Comprehensive approaches to school health promotion: how to achieve broader implementation?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Health Promoting School (HPS) and Comprehensive School Health Program (CSHP) initiatives have been proposed as a means of going beyond some of the limitations associated with health promotion initiatives aimed at school-aged children. This involves moving beyond practices that rely mainly on classroom-based health education models, to a more comprehensive, integrated approach of health promotion that focuses both on child-youth attitudes and behaviors, and their environment. Despite the tremendous potential of these initiatives in terms of health and educational gains, only rarely are they actually put into practice. This article briefly reviews the features of these initiatives, as well as the extent of their implementation and current benefits. Against that backdrop, the authors identify some issues to consider and propose four conditions with a view to achieving broader practical application of these approaches. These issues, which are discussed from the standpoint of potential avenues of further study and courses of action, relate to the comprehensive, integrated nature of the intervention, the school/family/community partnership, political and financial support from policy makers, and, finally, evaluative research as a support to implementation.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".