Development of Measures of Organizational Leadership for Health Promotion
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study describes the development and psychometric evaluation of four scales measuring leadership for health promotion at an organizational level in the baseline survey (n=144) of the Alberta Heart Health Project. Content validity was established through a series of focus groups and expert opinion appraisals, pilot testing of a draft based on capacity assessment instruments developed by other provinces involved in the Canadian Heart Health Initiative, and the literature. Psychometric analyses provided empirical evidence of the construct validity and reliability of the organizational leadership scales. Principal component analysis verified the unidimensionality of the leadership scales of (a) Practices for Organizational Learning, (b) Wellness Planning, (c) Workplace Climate, and (d) Organization Member Development. Scale alpha coefficients ranged between .79 and .91 thus establishing good to high scale internal consistencies. These measures can be used by both researchers and practitioners for the assessment of organizational leadership for health promotion and heart health promotion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it