Domains of Core Competency, Standards, and Quality Assurance for Building Global Capacity in Health Promotion: The Galway Consensus Conference Statement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports the outcome of the Galway Consensus Conference, an effort undertaken as a first step toward international collaboration on credentialing in health promotion and health education. Twenty-nine leading authorities in health promotion, health education, and public health convened a 2-day meeting in Galway, Ireland, during which the available evidence on credentialing in health promotion was reviewed and discussed. Conference participants reached agreement on core values and principles, a common definition, and eight domains of core competency required to engage in effective health promotion practice. The domains of competency are catalyzing change, leadership, assessment, planning, implementation, evaluation, advocacy, and partnerships. The long-term aim of this work is to stimulate a global dialogue that will lead to the development and widespread adoption of standards and quality assurance systems in all countries to strengthen capacity in health promotion, a critical element in achieving goals for the improvement of global population health.
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 | 0.323 | 0.182 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.012 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.028 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".