Preliminary instrument development to measure implementing a population health approach in sexual health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to describe the preliminary development and validation of an instrument to measure the extent that a population health approach was applied in sexual health by public health units in Ontario, Canada. DESIGN: Preliminary scale development and administration occurred in two phases that included item development and validity testing. MEASUREMENT AND SAMPLE: Two phases of development included: (1) using literature and expert input (n = 6) to develop items; and (2) validation of items by content experts (n = 5) and pre-testing (n = 3). RESULTS: The validated scale consisted of 69 items across the eight key elements of a population health approach. 15 out of 35 health units completed the survey, representing 43% of health units. Instrument administration revealed that Focus on the Health of Populations and Address the Determinants of Health and their Interactions were implemented more frequently compared to Collaborate Across Sectors and Levels and Employ Mechanisms for Public Involvement, which were infrequently implemented. CONCLUSION: This preliminary scale is a way for sexual health programs to measure the extent that a population health approach is implemented by their organization. Further testing with a broader sample is needed to strengthen generalizability and address reliability.
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 | 0.040 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".