MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163314866 · doi:10.1177/0741713610380438

Health Learning and Adult Education: In Search of a Theory of Practice

2010· article· en· W2163314866 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdult Education Quarterly · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth promotionHealth literacyIntervention (counseling)Adult LearningPsychologyHealth educationCommunity healthAdult educationMedical educationPromotion (chess)PedagogyPublic relationsGerontologyMedicinePublic healthNursingPolitical scienceHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fifty-five percent of Canadians aged 16 to 64 years lack the skills necessary to read and appropriately interpret health information in textual format. This critical review of research explores issues related to adults’ health and health literacy learning in an effort to illuminate why this unacceptable condition persists. The authors also explore avenues that show promise in leading to more success-producing strategies for health promotion among adults. Given the cyclical relationship of health with other social conditions, the problem has proved stubbornly resistant to educational intervention. A community of practice model is proposed as a means of addressing some of the weaknesses in previous adult education programs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.467 · 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