Health Promotion principles as a catalyst for translating the SDGs into more transformative action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ninth Global Conference on Health Promotion in Shanghai in November 2016 will focus on the role of health promotion in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs: UN 2015). This global forum coincides with the 30th Anniversary of the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion (WHO 1986) which has for three decades provided the framework for health promotion research policy and practice in five key action areas: ‘building healthy public policy creating supportive environments strengthening community actions developing personal skills and reorientating health services towards prevention of illness and promotion of health’. It is thus timely to ask where these action areas (and their subsequent iterations and elaborations from global conferences in Adelaide Sundsvall Jakarta Mexico Bangkok Nairobi and Helsinki) fit into the thrust of the SDGs. How might our global calls for action help shape the translation of the SDGs into concrete activities and what synergies can be exploited and discordances addressed between the Ottawa Charter (along with its later iterations) and the SDG agenda for 2031? (Excerpt)
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 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 | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".