MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956125866 · doi:10.1177/1524839919858589

Creative Strengths-Based Approaches to Health Promotion: Perspectives From Graduate Training Experiences

2019· article· en· W2956125866 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOptimism, Hope, and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of the Fraser Valley
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsHealth promotionMedical educationPromotion (chess)ReflexivityFlexibility (engineering)CreativityPsychologyHealth careNursingMedicineSociologyPolitical sciencePublic healthSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors met during a career development experience where they discussed the commonalities of their successes and challenges conducting creative strengths-based health promotion research with underserved communities during their graduate and postgraduate training. They identified changes to health promotion pedagogy that they would like to see in the future. These include understanding both the strengths and the challenges of creative strengths-based health promotion research conducted with underserved communities, ensuring that reflexivity and flexibility is a component of the process, developing support networks for trainees, understanding personal limitations to effect change, and supporting self-care. They hope that trainees and health education programs will learn from their experiences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.280
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.152 · 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