Health Promotion Activity in the Community -- Scoping Reviewed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health promotion is a multidisciplinary field that aims to improve the health and well-being of people not only by treating diseases, but also by promoting healthy lifestyles, preventing diseases, and addressing social, economic, and environmental factors that affect health. However, the meaning may vary according to the perspective of different actors and professionals. Scoping review, using the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online – US National Library of Medicine’s, for the articles that were published between January 1, 2018 and September 1, 2023, following the analysis procedures: title, summary reading, and total readership. The most mentioned activity in the 24 articles is health promotion associated with prevention in the community, with the home being the most referenced context. Based on Joanna Briggs’ Hierarchy of Evidence model, Institute, Redenç ao, indicates 5 levels of studies, namely: experimental studies, quasi-experimental studies, observational analytical studies, observational descriptive studies, and expert opinion. Therefore, the scope consisted of 24 articles from States United States, Brazil, Australia, South Asia, South Africa, Indonesia, Thailand, Newfoundland, Iran, Japan, South Africa, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Norway. The activity carried out by nursing at home focuses on individualized care and disease monitoring. Keywords: nursing, community health nursing, health promotion, primary prevention
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 | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".