Assessing the language availability, readability, suitability and comprehensibility of heat-health messaging content on health authority webpages and online resources in Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heat-health communication initiatives are a key public health protection strategy. Therefore, understanding the potential challenges that all Canadians and specific groups, such as those facing literacy barriers and non-native language speakers, may experience in accessing or interpreting information, is critical. This study reviewed and evaluated the language availability, readability, suitability, and comprehensibility of heat-related webpages and online resources ( n = 417) published on public health authority websites in Canada ( n = 73). Six validated readability scales and a comprehensibility instrument were used. Most content was presented in English (90 %); however, only 7 % of the online resources were available in more than one language. The average reading grade level of the content (grade 8) exceeded the recommended level (grade 6), and only 22 % of the content was deemed superior for suitability and comprehensibility. Our study evaluating web-based materials about extreme heat published by Canadian health authorities provides evidence that the current language availability, readability, suitability, and comprehensibility may be limiting the capacity for members of the public to discern key messaging. To ensure all Canadians can access and interpret information related to heat-health protection, public health authorities may consider translating their materials into additional languages and incorporating a readability evaluation to improve public understanding. • Heat events are public health emergencies that impact those with literacy barriers. • Heat-health communication initiatives are a key public health protection strategy. • The average reading grade level of the content exceeded the recommended level. • The current readability may limit the public's ability to discern key messaging. • Health authorities may consider translating their materials into more languages.
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.
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 | 0.015 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it