Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter explains vital elements in the salutogenic model of health and how these fit into the inner core of health promotion expressed in the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. Salutogenesis, is here considered as a theory, a life orientation and as the sense of coherence. In line with the salutogenic theory, health is described as a process in an ease/dis-ease continuum, defined as the movement towards the health end (ease). The generalized and specific resistance resources, defined in the chapter, are internal and external factors giving the prerequisites for developing a strong sense of coherence (SOC). The role of culture is essential in the salutogenic theory, here discussed based on previous research. Salutogenesis is much more than the measurement of SOC, it is seen as an umbrella concept, consisting of many different theoretical concepts and theories. Resilience and empowerment, both concepts familiar to many, are described more in detail. When lecturing Antonovsky always ended by saying: think salutogenically and act salutogenically. Therefore, this chapter ends with a question: what does it mean to be salutogenic, to think salutogenically and act salutogenically? This needs to be further explored. Continuous research is needed to answer the salutogenic question: “What creates health?”
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.006 |
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".