Individual-, Community-, and Organizational Health Literacy: The Need of Centralized, Integrated, and Multifaceted Health & Wellness Literacy Efforts for Racialized/ Immigrant Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Health literacy is essential to both personal and community health. Inadequate health literacy contributes to health disparities, especially for racialized/immigrant population. The efforts to improve health literacy need to be community-engaged and cross-sectoral involving the combined and coordinated efforts of all major stakeholders. Current health literacy efforts need to be reinvented, reformulated and redirected to improve health and wellnesses in this population in Alberta. Methods: Current health literacy initiatives predominantly focus on providing health information to individuals through different channels, most notably through health care providers. This approach essentially attempts to transfer information vertically and does not incorporate the individual and /or community context. To compensate for language barriers, the use of translated materials in different languages has been commonly practiced. However, these efforts fail to address the sociocultural factors that inhibit the uptake of health information Observation: Key policy challenges to health literacy for racialized immigrant communities are as follows - (1) Absence of meaningful community-engaged efforts (2) Complete lack of coordinated effort (3) Efforts are not aligned with community needs (4) Lack of understanding of community dynamics & (5) Lack of organizational health literacy. Conclusion: To overcome these issues, evidence suggests using community participatory and crosssectoral collaborative approaches to deeply engage with the community to develop trust, interest, and health literacy capacity among members. An added benefit is that enhanced health literacy can help cultivate an environment wherein researchers and policymakers are more easily able to partner with communities to identify and prioritize issues that need to be addressed through health literacy initiatives. Using a multifaceted approach and employing trained and culturally acceptable health educators to engage in direct personal level interactions and conversation.
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 | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".