Anatomy of an effective workplace health intervention: a comprehensive new model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study proposes a new model, called the Integrated Human Health Model (IHHM), to improve the design and effectiveness of Workplace Health Promotion (WHP) interventions. Design/methodology/approach Eighteen participants were purposefully selected from 44 participants in a 2.5-day WHP intervention targeting multiple health behaviours (MHB). The intervention has shown to improve quality of life and health-related behaviours in rigorous studies. Qualitative data collection methods were observations, repeat semi-structured interviews and weekly e-journals collected over three months. Template analysis was used to develop the IHHM describing participants' experiences. Findings The IHHM describes the health behaviour change process using eight themes: facilitation, assessment, desired life, barriers, knowledge and skills, insights, action planning, and monitor and support. Practical implications With the paucity of evidence informing WHP intervention effectiveness, this study provides a preliminary model serving practitioners to design more effective interventions and scholars to improve evidence. Originality/value This study proposes a practical comprehensive model for practitioners and leaders to more effectively design and evaluate successful MHB WHP interventions compared to existing models.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".