Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the year 2011, the International Union for Health Promotion and Education (IUHPE) is celebrating 60 years of dedication to health promotion. There are, in history, epoch making events. The birth of the IUHPE occurred just after the end of the war and just after the establishment of the World Health Organisation (WHO), two events which had a great influence on the atmosphere of reconstruction of a new life for Europe and for the world, in an effort to explore and promote values articulated in terms of philosophy and action. The governing idea in planning and launching the IUHPE was the establishment between all health workers of closer links and the promotion of mutual understanding which would contribute to constant progress (1). In the year 2011, we are also celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. It is a unique and exceptional time to reaffirm our engagement for a more equitable world and to contemplate with optimism changes for the future. We are therefore celebrating two events in our professional environment, a framework to guide our efforts at all levels whether political, academic and operational levels or local, regional, national and international, with respect of and in complementarity to our respective roles and missions. We are celebrating the cutting edge of public health. We are celebrating the role of health promotion as a public health response to challenges posed by our societies. We are celebrating principles and values that unite us into health promotion, that guide us and that enable us to identify in a world increasingly entangled with concepts, more or less consensual theories and practices. These values and principles form the habits of mind that in turn provide a common basis for the practice of health promotion. These include: a socio-ecological model of health that takes into account the cultural, economic, and social determinants of health; a commitment to equity, and social justice; a respect for cultural diversity and sensitivity; a dedication to sustainable development; and a participatory approach to engaging
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; 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".