MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144476358 · doi:10.1177/1757975909104097

The Galway Consensus Conference: international collaboration on the development of core competencies for health promotion and health education

2009· article· en· W2144476358 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Margaret M. Barry, John P. Allegrante, Marie-Claude Lamarre, M. Elaine Auld, Alyson Taub

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Health Promotion · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionUniversity of GalwayNational Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health PromotionUniversity of SouthamptonYork UniversityHáskólinn í ReykjavíkNational University of IrelandUniversitetet i BergenUniversity of CincinnatiEmory University
KeywordsHealth promotionPolitical scienceCapacity buildingGlobal healthPromotion (chess)Public relationsWorkforcePublic healthCore competencyMedicineNursingBusinessPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developing a competent health promotion workforce is a key component of capacity building for the future and is critical to delivering on the vision, values and commitments of global health promotion. This paper reports on an international consensus meeting to identify core competencies, jointly organized by the International Union for Health Promotion and Education (IUHPE), the Society for Public Health Education (SOPHE) and the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), with participation from international leaders in the field, that took place at the National University of Ireland, Galway, in June 2008. The purpose of the meeting is outlined and the outcomes in terms of strengthening global exchange, collaboration and common approaches to capacity building and workforce development are discussed. The Consensus Statement, based on the proceedings of the meeting, outlines core values and principles, a common definition and eight domains of core competency that are required to engage in effective health promotion practice. The core domains of competency agreed to at the meeting are: catalysing change, leadership, assessment, planning, impementation, evaluation, advocacy and partnerships. A summary of the Consensus Statement is presented and further dialogue and discussion are invited in order to continue the process of building international consensus with regard to health promotion core competencies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.124
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1240.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0080.022
Research integrity0.0180.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations164
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Health PromotionSame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207