MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2247128303

An evidence-based approach to an evaluation of a health promoting schools intervention

2003· dissertation· en· W2247128303 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marita Lynagh

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2003
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)MedicinePsychologyNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is now widely accepted that schools are ideal settings for health promotion initiatives which target health and health risk behaviour of school-aged children. The current approach to school-based health promotion, known as the Health Promoting Schools (HPS) approach, embraces the principles of the Ottawa Charter and focuses on opportunities for action on: the formal school curriculum; the school environment (or informal curriculum); and links with the home and wider community. Acceptance and endorsement of the approach has come from several leading international and Australian health promotion organisations. Despite the large amount of interest and enthusiasm generated, there remain a number of significant gaps in knowledge and research evidence, particularly that which addresses the efficacy and effectiveness of the HPS approach. The recent drive by influential bodies for evidence-based heath promotion further supports the need for the application of a systematic framework to the development and evaluation of HPS interventions. This thesis, therefore, describes the application of the Staged Approach to health promotion practice and research model to the development and evaluation of a HPS intervention program which aims to reduce three priority health risk behaviours (smoking, unsafe alcohol use and inadequate sun protection) among a cohort sample of Australian adolescents. Chapter One of this thesis provides the background to the development of the HPS approach, identifies the key gaps in knowledge and research evidence, and outlines the stages of the Staged Approach model and its application to the development and evaluation of a HPS intervention. Chapter Two describes an audit of published literature over an 18-year period to provide an overall picture of the quantity of available evidence within each of the stages of health promotion practice. Chapter Three first identifies health issues which are appropriate to target in school-based health promotion, then applies Stages I and II of the Staged Approach by reviewing the available evidence on adequacy of measures and current prevalence, determinants and target groups. The design, methods and development of a measurement tool for a descriptive, baseline study on the prevalence and determinants of three health risk behaviours among young adolescents in the Hunter Region is outlined in Chapter Four, with the findings from this study described in Chapter Five. A critical review of school-based programs and HPS trials implemented to date is described in Chapter Six, as the first step in evaluating the efficacy and acceptability of interventions (Stage Ill of the Staged Approach). The review considers the extent to which the HPS approach has been conducted in trials, as well as issues regarding study design, outcomes and quality of available research. Chapter Seven describes a randomised controlled trial of a HPS intervention program which aimed to reduce the prevalence of three health risk behaviours among young adolescents in the Hunter region. The model of implementation and specific strategies are outlined, as well as the acceptability and degree of implementation as a process evaluation of the program. Chapter Eight reports on the impact/outcome evaluation of the program concerning its effectiveness in reducing the prevalence of three health risk behaviours and their determinants. Finally, Chapter Nine draws conclusions regarding the effectiveness of the HPS approach, provides recommendations for the implementation of future school-based health promotion initiatives and addresses issues of dissemination and wider adoption of HPS programs as indicated by the final stages of the Staged Approach model.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0720.000

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 head0.282
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.115 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicHermeneutics and Narrative IdentityFrench-language works237,207