MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057796221 · doi:10.1055/s-0028-1103306

Empowerment durch Kapazitätsentwicklung im Quartier – erste Ergebnisse und Einschätzung eines Erhebungsinstruments

2008· article· de· W2057796221 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDas Gesundheitswesen · 2008
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Medical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Context (archaeology)Promotion (chess)PsychologyEmpowermentDisadvantagedCapacity buildingHealth promotionApplied psychologyNursingMedicinePublic healthGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Capacity building is regarded as an intermediate outcome and success parameter for community health promotion and empowerment. The first aim of the study was the development and examination of a tool to measure capacity building in the context of a programme of health promotion for children and parents in a socially disadvantaged quarter in Hamburg (about 3000 residents, 60% with migration background). The second aim was to measure capacity building within a period of five years. METHOD: A survey was carried out with 27 professionals from the health and social field. Dimensions of the instrument were: citizen participation, local leadership, available resources, networking and co-operation, support of residents. At the same time, we tested to what extent the instrument is suitable for resident surveys. Furthermore, pretest instrument and results were discussed with our advisory board regarding potential improvements. RESULTS: The result of the project, in addition to its practical use in the quarter, consists of the generation of a psychometrically tested instrument to measure capacity building. Furthermore, the experience contributed to the expertise on how such a study can be conducted. A comparison of the situation in 2006 with the situation in 2001 showed considerable improvements in all dimensions of capacity building in the quarter. CONCLUSION: Establishing the instrument on a long-term basis calls for more intensive examination not only of the chances, but also the limitations of the tool. We mainly attribute the overall positive picture that was gained within a period of five years to the generally supportive climate of development in the quarter as well as to the strong and continuous commitment of individual persons involved.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.013

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.367 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it