La participación social como estrategia central de la nutrición comunitaria para afrontar los retos asociados a la transición nutricional
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In last decades modern societies are undergoing a rapid nutrition transition process that reinforces, at international level, the emergence of nutritional problems of contradictory nature, such as malnutrition and obesity. This represents a considerable challenge for contemporary Public Health leaders, who have been gradually developing a set of strategies which overwhelmingly adopt a population perspective. Nevertheless, the collective nature of these strategies could neglect the particular individual and family needs. We consider social participation as an approach to simultaneously reinforce both individual and population perspectives during the divers phases of development of Community Nutrition programs which tackle the paradoxical nature of this problematic. However in relation to some contextual factors, we find a growing trend to develop a more technocratic dimension of participatory practices, which distorts the emancipator and transformative potential of social participation. In order to avoid this tendency, we propose the use of the five intervention axes of the Ottawa Chart for Health Promotion as a guide for a systemic integration of social participation in planning, implementation and evaluation processes of Community Nutrition programs. We therefore take into account the integration of social participation in the efforts made in developing individual capacity-building, reinforcing collective action, creating enabling environments, health care reorganization, and finally, implementing nutritional and public health policies.
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 | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".