Bibliographic record
Abstract
Police officers are uniquely positioned in that they are often the first on scene to respond following health-related calls for help. As a result, they often encounter victims and vulnerable community members at risk for adverse outcomes and low health literacy. In response, a large urban police department in the Southwestern United States, the Phoenix Police Department, implemented a 60-minute didactic Health Literacy Training for Public Safety Professionals presentation to educate recruits in the police academy about health literacy universal precautions and how to apply them specifically to police practice. To evaluate the training’s impact, participating recruits completed pre- and post-training surveys assessing health literacy knowledge, self-efficacy, and planned use of health literacy universal precautions in victim encounters. Survey responses were then analysed using paired sample t-tests, and crosstabs analysis was performed to assess differences by participants’ age, gender, and education level. In total, six trainings were delivered to 139 police recruits, and there were significant improvements in their knowledge of health literacy, self-efficacy, and intended frequency of use of communication techniques (p < 0.001). There was no significant association between recruits’ age, gender, and education level on post-training survey responses. Following the health literacy training, the improved knowledge, self-efficacy, and planned behaviour across age, gender, and education history supports the benefit of health literacy training for all policerecruits. Moreover, findings support the notion that evidence-based and standardized health literacy trainings should be widely incorporated into the education of public safety professionals.
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 | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".