Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health promotion is defined as the process of enabling people to increase control over and improve their health. It is a holistic approach that moves beyond the focus on individual behavior toward a wide range of societal and environmental interventions. It was first emphasized in the Ottawa Charter on Health Promotion. The global present context of a ‘triple burden of diseases’ creates an urgent need to foster sustainable health systems, promote intersectoral action to build healthy public policies, and nurture leadership for public health focusing on health promotion. Health promotion is tuned to respond to developments outside the traditional health sector that have a direct or indirect bearing on health such as changes in patterns of consumption, globalization, and urbanization. The adoption of healthy behavior by individuals is predicated on wider community awareness and acceptance. The health promotion approach utilizes upstream interventions focusing on improving fundamental social and economic determinants of health, which are elucidated in the chapter. Public health approaches to health promotion – tailored to specific behaviors, specific sites, and by using specific media tailored to the local context – have been elucidated using illustrative case studies. Methodological issues and challenges in the evaluation of the health promotion approach have been addressed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.016 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".