Bibliographic record
Abstract
the ideas spread and are accepted than that their source be mentioned, even though I am frequently motivated (and frustrated) to think "But we said that years ago in the Charter…."The generation that developed the the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion set out to classify what it takes to address public health in modern societies, not only in the 20 th but even more so in the health society of the 21 st century (Kickbush, 2007).I still maintain that the document was very much ahead of its time and that its full importance and potential has not yet been fully recognized.When teaching or lecturing on health promotion I need to remind myself all the time that many of my students were not yet in primary school when we met during those cold days in November 1986 in Ottawa.The future of the Ottawa Charter lies with them -in my view it has not yet really come.References
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.023 | 0.029 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.011 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".