Facilitators and Challenges to Organizational Capacity Building in Heart 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
The authors describe the facilitators and challenges to a multi-sectoral initiative aiming at building organizational capacity for heart health promotion in Nova Scotia, Canada. The research process was guided by participatory action research. The study included 21 organizations from diverse sectors. Participant selection for the data collection was purposive. The authors collected data through organizational reflection logs and one-to-one semistructured interviews and used grounded theory techniques for the data analyses. Factors influencing organizational capacity for heart health promotion varied, depending on the project stage. Nonetheless, leadership, organizational readiness, congruence, research activities, technical supports, and partnerships were essential to capacity-building efforts. Approaches to organizational capacity building should be multi-leveled, because organizations are influenced by multiple social systems that are not all equally supportive of capacity.
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 | 0.033 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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