MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090833833 · doi:10.1177/109258721502000205

Communication Strategies to Promote Health <i>Sun Safety in Outdoor Recreation Settings</i>

2015· article· en· W3090833833 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Larry Beck, Barbara J. Walkosz, Peter E. Andersen, A. C. Abbott, David B. Buller, Michael D. Scott, Rachel Eye

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpretation Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationRecreationIntervention (counseling)Public relationsPromotion (chess)Health promotionInterpretation (philosophy)Outdoor educationMarketingBusinessPsychologyPublic healthAdvertisingMedicineNursingPolitical sciencePedagogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The field of interpretation is increasingly acknowledging the potential for strategic health promotion. The purpose of this paper is to introduce Go Sun Smart (GSS) Resorts, a sun safety program directed to guests recreating outdoors at destination resorts and parks in the United States and Canada. This paper aims to present a sun safety intervention that was designed to promote advanced sun safety practices to the field of interpretation. With a foundation in Diffusion of Innovations Theory and Transportation Theory this paper will present the intervention materials and strategies developed by GSS to showcase the potential to promote health behaviors. Intervention materials that were developed include posters, tip cards, a Public Service Announcement (PSA) video, additional electronic and print materials, employee trainings, GSS certification, and an interpretive script for use prior to various outdoor activities.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interpretation ResearchSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207