Global perspectives on dementia and art: An international discussion about changing public health policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an era of global environmental deterioration and income inequity, public health faces many challenges, including the growing number of individuals, especially older people, with chronic diseases. Dementia is increasingly being seen not just as a biomedical problem to solve but as a public and community challenge to address more broadly. Concepts like prevention, brain health, and quality of life/well-being are receiving more attention. The engagement of community in addressing these challenges is being seen as critical to successful social adaptation. Arts programs are reinvigorating cultural responses to the growing number of older people with cognitive challenges. The humanities offer ways of understanding the power of words and stories in public discourse and a critical lens though which to view political and economic influences. In this paper, we report on a panel held in London on the occasion of the conference at the Royal Society for Public Health in March, 2017, in which the authors presented. Key issues discussed included problem framing, the nature of evidence, the politics of power and influence, and the development of effective interventions. In this paper, we review the rejection of two policies, one on dementia and one on the arts and humanities in public health, by the American Public Health Association; the emergence of policies in the UK; and some of the state of the art practices, particularly in training, again focusing on the UK.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".