Från Ottawa Charter till Shanghai Statement – en 30 årig resa i hälsofrämjande arbete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Det är 30 år sedan Ottawa Charter antogs i Kanada. I den här ledarartikeln presenteras de grundläggande idéerna vid Ottawa konferensen 1986. Dess framväxt och genomslag diskuteras i ett 10, 20 och 25 årigt perspektiv. Utgångspunkten är artiklar skrivna av några av nyckelaktörerna vid de internationella WHO konferenser som varit en fortsättning för utveckling av hälsofrämjande arbete (Health Promotion) och som startade 1986. Konferenserna har varit viktiga för att föra upp strategiska frågor på den hälsopolitiska agendan och varit policyskapande motorer för en positiv hälsoutveckling inom länder och i organisationer. Dessa konferenser har sedan Ottawakonferensen 1986 lyft fram olika begrepp, principer och aktionsområden och placerat in hälsofrämjande (Health Promotion) i ett globalt sammanhang. Den 9:e internationella Health promotion konferensen i Shanghai har som tema ”Hälsofrämjande i de hållbara utvecklingsmålen”.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.009 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".