HEALTH & SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY TO IMPROVE THE POPULATION'S HEALTH: THE SCOPE OF 'NEW PUBLIC HEALTH' IN CANADA'S PROVINCIAL AGENDAS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada’s leadership in population health promotion has been internationally acclaimed, especially in the years following the 1986 endorsement of the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion by Canada’s National Health and Welfare Department, the Canadian Public Health Association and the European Region of the World Health Organization. The Ottawa Charter recognized that health promotion goes beyond the health care sector and promoting healthy lifestyles, to introducing changes in all government sectors in order to alter social conditions associated with poor population health and to improve ‘population health and well-being’ more generally. The principles of the Ottawa Charter have since then been endorsed by 27 countries and are supported by a research infrastructure to study how social conditions determine health outcomes. The Canadian federal government has demonstrated significant international leadership in health promotion and the new public health for many years.1 The main efforts of public health are directed at improving the population’s health through protecting health (such as food and water safety), monitoring the population’s health, preventing diseases and injuries and managing epidemics. But efforts undertaken since the mid-1980s comprise a broader view of health, inclusive of well-being, and refer to a certain understanding of the ways in which lifestyles, living conditions and health outcomes are interconnected.2 In addition to the
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 | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 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".