MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033827765 · doi:10.4103/jehp.jehp_23_20

A comprehensive model of health education barriers of health-care system in Iran

2020· article· en· W3033827765 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Health Promotion · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Health Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careNonprobability samplingPsychologyHealth educationWorkloadNursingQualitative researchInterpersonal communicationPublic relationsMedical educationMedicinePublic healthSocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceEnvironmental healthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: According to the importance of health education (HE) in disease control and prevention and inadequacy of HE in the Iran's health-care system, clarifying the HE barriers is necessary. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to clarifying the comprehensive model of HE barriers of health-care system in Iran. METHODS: This qualitative study was conducted in 2019. Twenty-one health experts and physicians at different levels of the health system, a former health deputy of the Ministry of Health, and 26 community health workers (CHWs) were selected through purposive sampling. Data were collected through semi-structured individual interviews and group discussions and analyzed simultaneously by conventional content analysis. RESULTS: Five themes were extracted including individual barriers (most important categories: inadequate ability of CHWs in HE, poor motivational factors at individual level, and educator's wrong beliefs), interpersonal (most important categories: weakness of other health-care providers in the education of CHWs, lack of proper understanding by health authorities of scientific and correct HE, inappropriate communication, unrealistic expectations from CHWs, problems with monitoring and supervision, poor work commitment, and client-related problems), organizational (most important categories: high workload of CHWs, problems related to educational resources, inappropriate attitude of managers and officials, and inappropriate evaluation and monitoring), community (most important categories: not believing CHWs by people, people's disinterest and lack of motivation in education, cultural problems, problems with the Internet and virtual social networks, and weak cross-sectoral cooperation), and contextual barriers (most important categories: barriers related to universities, broadcasting, the nature of HE science, as well as gap between practical education and theory). CONCLUSION: Considering the multidimensional barriers such as individual, interpersonal, organizational, community, and contextual barriers, compiling and executing a comprehensive document with the participation of authorities, specialists, and service providers is recommended to remove barriers. This is in line with the Ottawa Charters' "reorienting health services."

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.349
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.208 · 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