Systematic review of population-based studies on the impact of images on UV attitudes and behaviours
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual images have been shown to influence health behaviours. The effectiveness of population interventions, which use visual images to influence skin cancer prevention behaviours, has not been systematically evaluated. We, therefore, undertook a systematic review of peer-reviewed, health education and health promotion research on skin cancer and tanning to examine the outcomes of studies, which used visual images as part of their methodology. Our objective was to describe the impact of visual images on UV protection and exposure attitudes and behaviours across the studies. Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. Images positively impact knowledge, attitudes and behaviours related to UV exposure and UV protection. Images also influence the perceived attractiveness of untanned or tanned skin, which in turn, influences UV exposure attitudes and behaviours. Implications for future health promotion research and practice are discussed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it