MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113785460 · doi:10.1093/heapro/das067

Health rights pamphlets: critical literacy and inclusive citizenship, South Africa

2012· article· en· W2113785460 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marla J. Strecker, Maria Stuttaford, Leslie London

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion International · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsCitizenshipCivil societyAccountabilityCharterCollective actionRight to healthPolitical scienceLiteracyPublic relationsActive citizenshipHealth careSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ottawa Charter recognizes the importance of strengthening community action for health and developing personal skills. At the same time, a rights-based approach to health includes the right to information, participation and accountability. The Learning Network for Health and Human Rights is a research and learning collaboration between Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and universities in the Western Cape, South Africa. For the purposes of this article, a CSO is understood to be any organization that is outside of the state and private market sector. As part of a wider programme of action research, the learning network developed six pamphlets aimed at enhancing individual and collective skills to support action related to the implementation of the right to health. The research reported here analyses how the pamphlets, coupled with directed training, strengthened skills, promoted critical literacy and supported inclusive citizenship. Eighteen semi-structured interviews and eight focus groups were conducted with 59 participants from eight CSOs, their members, beneficiaries and communities. The success of the pamphlets was found to be attributed to the role they played in a wider training programme, requested by the CSOs and developed jointly by CSOs and university-based researchers. Community action on the right to health is contingent on personal as well as collective skills development. Understanding of the right to health and skills for participation and accountability were extended in breadth and depth, which enabled inclusive citizenship.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Promotion InternationalSame topicHuman Rights and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207