MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The evolving concept of health promotion: definitions, outcomes and classification of interventions

2015· article· pl· W2229814612 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mariusz Duplaga

Bibliographic record

VenueJagiellonian University Repository (Jagiellonian University) · 2015
Typearticle
Languagepl
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, psychology, and well-being
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersExecutive Agency for Health and ConsumersEuropean Commission
KeywordsHealth promotionPsychological interventionContext (archaeology)Promotion (chess)Public relationsHealth careHealth policyMedicinePsychologyPolitical sciencePublic healthNursingPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of health promotion was evolving from 70ies of 20th century in response to calls for increasing the effectiveness of measures undertaken for the improvement of health of individuals and societies.Although, a classical definition of health promotion was formulated in Ottawa Charter in 1986, the perception of this domain may still vary depending on different authors and organizations.This paper brings some basis insights on approaches to systematising available definitions of health promotion as well as to classifying its interventions.Furthermore, the outcome model of health promotion is described in order to better reflect the relation between interventions undertaken under the umbrella of health promotion and possible short-and long-term results.Finally, the definitions of various levels of disease prevention are proposed and the discussion of similarities and differences between health promotion and disease prevention is included.The paper was developed with the intention of formulating theoretical basis for analysis of available evidence on effectiveness of health promotion and disease prevention interventions addressed to elderly audience.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJagiellonian University Repository (Jagiellonian University)Same topicHealth, psychology, and well-beingFrench-language works237,207