MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294842197 · doi:10.31644/amu.v01.n02.2022.a11

¿Qué es salud? Revisión histórica del concepto a partir de la definición de la OMS en 1948

2022· article· es· W4294842197 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luis Ernesto Hernández Gamboa

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Anales de Medicina Universitaria · 2022
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Health and Social Inequalities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El presente es un artículo de revisión por lo que se hace una descripción pormenorizada, selectiva y crítica que recoge información relevante de la definición de salud y su evolución, desde la definición publicada por la OMS, en 1948, siendo integrada en una perspectiva unitaria y de conjunto. Tiene como finalidad plantear los cambios históricos que ha tenido el concepto de salud, partiendo de la primera definición que elaboró la Organización Mundial de la Salud, posterior a su creación al término de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, en al año 1948. No buscamos proponer una nueva definición, sino hacer una revisión de los cambios que han sucedido desde el surgimiento del mismo y que han impactado de una u otra forma en la manera de entender y modificar los sistemas de salud. No se busca entonces, comprender la evolución antes del surgimiento de este importante concepto, sino identificar lo sucedido a partir del surgimiento de la definición de salud, que fue un hito histórico al separarse de enfermedad, hasta nuestros días. Palabras clave: Salud; dimensiones sociales; Atención Primaria; Declaración de Vancouver.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.038
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Anales de Medicina UniversitariaSame topicPublic Health and Social InequalitiesFrench-language works237,207