Factors Facilitating the Implementation of Church-Based Heart Health Promotion Programs for Older Adults: A Qualitative Study Guided by the Precede-Proceed Model
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the factors facilitating the implementation of heart health promotion programs for older adults in Anglican, United, and Catholic churches. DESIGN: The study used qualitative methods comprising semistructured interviews and focus groups. SETTING: The interviews and focus groups were conducted in Anglican, Catholic, and United churches located in the Canadian cities of Toronto and Hamilton, Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: Twelve ordained pastors and 21 older parishioners who attended church regularly and who had no health conditions were recruited to best explain how churches could be suitable locations for health promotion activities targeting older adults. METHODS: Twelve semistructured interviews with the pastors and three focus groups with the 21 parishioners were undertaken. A component of the Precede-Proceed model (a model for planning health education and health promotion programs and policies) was applied to the findings after direct content analysis of the data. RESULTS: Participants identified pastor leadership, funding for a parish nurse, community-focused interventions, secured infrastructure, and social support from congregation members as pertinent factors required for implementing health promotion programs in Anglican, United, and Catholic churches. CONCLUSION: The findings have particular relevance for health promotion and public health because they suggest factors that would be necessary to design church-based heart health promotion programs for older adults at risk of chronic diseases.
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.
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 | 0.016 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it