MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586310827 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckv176.143

Health for All: Promoting health equity across a regional health authority

2015· article· en· W2586310827 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lynda Tjaden, Howard Moffat, Lindsay Elliott, S. Harlos, L Sourin

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsWinnipeg Regional Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth equityBusinessEquity (law)Health promotionEnvironmental healthMedicinePolitical sciencePublic healthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of health equity has gained momentum yet it has not resulted in significant and concrete public health action in Canada. People living in some areas of Winnipeg, Canada have nearly 19 years lower life expectancy than people living in other parts of the city. This requires a public health response. Health for All is the integrated approach (not a stand-alone project or program) to weave health equity action into all decision-making and service provision to the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority (WRHA). The WRHA is responsible for providing universal publically funded healthcare to more than 700,000 people. WRHA’s Public Health team provides leadership to the health authority efforts. The long term (30 + years) goal is to embed equity action in all decision-making and eliminate health inequity. The actions needed do not lie solely within the healthcare sector and involve engaging with community actors to work together on solutions. The WRHA released a position statement (2012) and committed to ensuring health equity actions are embedded in the provision of all health care services and facilitating partnerships to amplify health equity action within and beyond the health sector. In 2013, Health for All: Building Winnipeg’s Health Equity Action Plan was released to build common understanding of health gaps and describe potential areas of action. A Population Health Equity Initiatives Leader was hired in 2014. As of 2015, a region-wide committee contributes strategic leadership with three working groups supporting activities. Additional efforts include engaging senior leadership to include equity within the organization’s strategic plan and into other key priorities (e.g., patient flow, quality and accreditation). Health leadership, community engagement and intersectoral partnership have supported incremental change within the health authority. A long term vision and commitment is required to improve health equity outcomes. This requires an innovative public health response in order and create opportunities that will address systemic and structural barriers to equity-centered care. Key messages Health for All is the integrated approach to weave health equity action into all decision-making and service provision to the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority A long term vision and commitment to incremental change is required to improve health equity outcomes

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0030.015
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.004

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 head0.364
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.090 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public HealthSame topicGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207