Education, practical training and professional development for public health practitioners: a scoping review of the literature and insights for sustainable food system capacity-building
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Noting the upstream positioning of sustainable food systems (SFS) to multiple global crises, the present review described examples of emerging and promising practices to support SFS-oriented education, practical training (PT) and continuing professional development (CPD) among trainees and public health practitioners (PHP). A secondary objective was to compile the evidence into practical considerations for educators, supervising practitioners and professional associations. DESIGN: A scoping review of the literature published between 2007 and 2017 was conducted in May 2017 using four databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus and HSSA, along with bibliography hand-searching and expert consultation. Articles were screened for relevance and specificity by independent raters. RESULTS: Nineteen articles were included for analysis. Two-thirds of the articles related to dietitians and public health nutritionists. Emerging practices included curriculum-based considerations, incorporation of 'sustainability' within professional competencies and self-reflection related to SFS. Descriptions of SFS-related education, PT and CPD practices appeared largely in the literature from developed countries. Articles converged on the need for ecosystems, food systems and sustainability considerations within and across practice to support current and future practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: There is growing interest in SFS but guidance to support educators and preceptors is lacking. Updates to dietary guidelines to reflect issues of sustainability are a timely prompt to examine the education, training and development needs of trainees and PHP. Practical examples of emerging practices can empower PHP to promote SFS in all areas of practice. More research is needed to address identified gaps in the literature and to improve SFS-specific education, PT and CPD.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; 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".