Towards the development of scales to measure 'will' to promote heart health within health organizations in Canada
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
This paper describes the development and psychometric evaluation of scales measuring the dimensions of 'will' (belief, confidence, prior action and desire) for heart health promotion specifically and health promotion in general at both an individual and organizational level. Content validity was established through a series of focus groups and expert opinion assessments, based on a compilation of capacity-assessment instruments developed by other provinces involved in the Canadian Heart Health Initiative and the literature. Psychometric analyses of questionnaire data provided empirical evidence of the construct validity and reliability of the 16 individual and 21 organizational level 'will' scales. A series of principal component analyses assisted in verifying the unidimensionality of the measures and all scales yielded high internal consistencies with Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranging between 0.73 and 0.96. These measures can be used by both researchers and practitioners for assessing the 'will' to promote heart health specifically and health promotion in general.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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