Development of a Core Online Health Literacy Course 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
Health literacy has implications for people’s ability to make healthy decisions and manage their own health. To improve health literacy, we need to improve the knowledge and skills of those who receive and those who provide health information and services, while paying attention to demands of the environment that shape people’s skills and abilities. Higher education can play a critical role in nurturing a health literate population. This article articulates the need to integrate health literacy courses into health-related degree programs through the integration of Bandura’s work and Core Competencies for Public Health put forward by Canada. Offering such courses in varying formats will help prepare learners to better understand the growing demand for a health literate workforce and will contribute to the ongoing public health initiatives in improving health-related settings by removing health-related barriers. This article outlines the need for a systematic development of health literacy courses based on the integration of instructional and health literacy principles. An example of a core online undergraduate health literacy course in Canada is presented. Insights are offered into how educators can develop and modify their own health literacy courses, which aim to help learners explore ideologies, practices, tools, and policies guiding health literacy efforts for diverse people across settings.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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