MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149163945 · doi:10.5296/jse.v3i3.3750

The School Health Approach in Quebec: Perceptions of Students’ Parents

2013· article· en· W2149163945 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marie-Claude Rivard, Sylvain Turcotte

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Studies in Education · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSchool Health and Nursing Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth promotionSituatedPerceptionConstructiveContext (archaeology)PsychologyPromotion (chess)Action (physics)Health educationDevelopmental psychologyPublic relationsSocial psychologyNursingMedicinePublic healthGeographyPolitical scienceProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Quebec, the Healthy School and Global Health approaches, situated at the crossroads of education and health, attract attention for their global and integrated promotion of young people’s health. Within the context of these emerging approaches, this questionnaire-based study aims to describe how parents (N=573) perceive health in the school setting, their role with regard to health and the ways they engage with their child in this regard. The collected data have been analyzed using a socio-ecological framework; findings reveal that parents have a positive view of school health, but do not necessarily associate it with the approach recommended in the environment as a whole. Generally speaking, they link health to lifestyles, particularly healthy diet and exercise, and demonstrate their involvement in various ways depending on their socio-economic status. This discussion examines the communication strategies employed to familiarize parents with said approaches in school-family relationships and highlights the importance of developing their critical thinking so that parent-child interactions will prove relevant and constructive in the promotion of health. Concerted action and a shared vision for health education among stakeholders in the school and family environments are suggested to optimize the impacts on young people’s day-to-day life.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.435 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Studies in EducationSame topicSchool Health and Nursing EducationFrench-language works237,207