MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987042874 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckz186.475

Measuring health promotion in a sports club setting: a modified Delphi study

2019· article· en· W2987042874 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stacey Johnson, Anne Vuillemin, Susanna Geidne, Sami Kokko, Jonathan Epstein, Aurélie Van Hoye

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSchool Health and Nursing Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingDelphi methodClubRelevance (law)Health promotionDelphiPsychologyFocus groupApplied psychologyCharterPublic relationsPromotion (chess)Medical educationMarketingMedicinePolitical scienceBusinessNursingPublic healthComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The settings-based approach has become an increasing focus in health promotion since the World Health Organization’s 1986 Ottawa Charter. Schools and cities have implemented this approach, but development within sports clubs is limited. Thus, an internationally validated measurement of health promotion within this setting is lacking. Methods A modified Delphi study was completed to develop an international evaluation tool grounded in the settings-based approach. Expert panelists from academia, sports and health sectors were invited to participate in 3 online rounds. Items were generated or selected based on 3 prior Delphi-based studies and 2 nationally validated scales. Round one created a collaborative list of items, round two validated items based on relevance, importance and feasibility and the final round classified items into one of four determinants: cultural, social, environmental or economic. Results Panelists (69) from 13 countries participated in creating a final list of 62 items at 3 organizational levels. The sports club level included; 5 cultural, 6 social, 6 environmental and 5 economic items. The management level included; 5 cultural, 5 social, 5 environmental and 3 economic items. The coaching level included; 5 cultural, 5 social, 4 environmental and 4 economic items. Conclusions This study provides three important innovations; 1- it is rooted in theory through the settings-based approach, 2- the measurement tool includes three levels within sports clubs, capturing a whole club dynamic and 3- all items included in the tool have been validated by an international panel of experts. Key messages This 62-item measurement tool allows the comparison of perceptions from participants, coaches and management regarding how health is promoted within their sports club. This information offers insight on the capacity of sports clubs to implement and monitor policies and practices on the promotion of health beyond sports performance within their organization.

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)0.057
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0570.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.450
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public HealthSame topicSchool Health and Nursing EducationFrench-language works237,207