Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ottawa Charter is a significant document in relation to health promotion and the priorities for action needed to facilitate health for all people. The relevance of this document to an intensive care setting and the extent to which it may be translated into meaningful practice is examined in this paper. Acute care is an area lying at the extreme end of tertiary health, and at first glance it may be difficult to reconcile the significance of health promotion and the Ottawa Charter with this particular area of health care practice. On closer inspection, however, the relevance of the Charter lies in its impact on the number and type of patients seen in the Intensive Care Unit, and on the effect that the implementation of the health promotion action areas has on the client base. Even at the extreme end of tertiary care it is equally important to be aware of public health issues and to advocate, enable and mediate, where necessary, on behalf of and alongside patients, particularly as we care for them when they are most vulnerable. A commitment to both action and meaningful practice must continue to be pursued while equity in health remains a goal to be achieved.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.090 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".