Building Capacity for Heart Health Promotion: Results of a 5-Year Experience in Nova Scotia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To present the outcomes of a capacity-building initiative for heart health promotion. DESIGN: Follow-up study combining quantitative and qualitative methods. SETTING: The Western Health Region of Nova Scotia, Canada. SUBJECTS: Twenty organizations, including provincial and municipal agencies and community groups engaged in health, education, and recreation activities. INTERVENTION: Two strategies were used for this study: partnership development and organizational development. Partnership development included the creation of multilevel partnerships in diverse sectors. Organizational development included the provision of technical support, action research, community activation, and organizational consultation. MEASURES: Quantitative data included number and type of partnerships, learning opportunities, community activation initiatives, and organizational changes. Qualitative data included information on the effectiveness of partnerships, organizational consultation, and organizational changes. RESULTS: Results included the development of 204 intersectoral partnerships, creation of a health promotion clearinghouse, 47 workshops attended by approximately 1400 participants, diverse research products, implementation of 18 community heart health promotion initiatives, and increased organizational capacity for heart health promotion via varied organizational changes, including policy changes, fund reallocations, and enhanced knowledge and practices. CONCLUSIONS: Partnership and organizational development were effective mechanisms for building capacity in heart health promotion. This intervention may have implications for large-scale, community-based, chronic-disease prevention projects.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".