MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125503960 · doi:10.1093/heapro/17.3.223

Children's perceptions of strategies for resolving community health problems

2002· article· en· W2125503960 on OpenAlexafffund
Ilze Kalnins

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion International · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPerceptionEnvironmental healthPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine children's perceptions of the strategies they would use to resolve community health problems. Qualitative analysis using a grounded theory approach showed that 9- to 10-year-old children could conceptualize a range of solutions to hypothetical community health problems. Children's responses reflected an egocentric perspective, one that was centered on self and peers acting on short-term solutions to the immediate problem. Less frequently, children conceptualized broader structural interventions aimed at removing the problem altogether. Children could name resource persons including their friends, family, school personnel and other people in the community. However, outside of their family and peers, their knowledge was non-specific, i.e. it is doubtful that they would actually be able to access the resources. In light of our findings we discuss several important implications for future research. We note that children are interested in changing community conditions that affect their heath. However, their recognition of their marginalized position in adult society and their perception that adults do not take them seriously may be significant barriers to their participation. We suggest that society must rethink the position and roles that are assigned to children so that their valuable potential is not lost.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Promotion InternationalSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207