Interorganizational Relationships in the Heart and Stroke Foundation’s Spark Together for Healthy Kids™
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
The Heart and Stroke Foundation's Spark Together for Healthy Kids™ (Spark) is a multiyear initiative in Ontario, Canada, that takes a population approach to obesity prevention. It focuses on creating healthy environments by improving access to healthy foods and physical activity, with an emphasis on strengthening the advocacy capacity of organizations and citizens. Consistent with the complexity of the intervention, the evaluation of Spark applied systems concepts and methods to test the utility of network analysis as a method for evaluation, and to inform collaborations of organizations involved in programs and advocacy. Relationships among organizations from different sectors and jurisdictional levels with a focus on school community environments were of particular interest. Interorganizational network analysis was used to understand these relationships, including the role of the Heart and Stroke Foundation. Findings revealed a niche brokering role for the Heart and Stroke Foundation and other provincial and national organizations, and the importance of these brokers for engaging local and regional organizations. Findings also reinforced the importance of a mixed methods approach to network analysis, and the potential value of the analysis for scientific and practical purposes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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