Bibliographic record
Abstract
The publication of "Shaping a Healthier \nFuture, A Strategy for Effective Health Care \nin the 1990's" by the Department of Health \n& Children in 1994 is rightly regarded as a major \nturning point in the development of health policies in \nthe Republic of Ireland. One of the key elements of \nthe strategy outlined in this publication is the \norientation of the health services "towards a health \npromotion approach based on encouraging people to \ntake responsibility for their own health and on \nproviding the environmental support necessary to \nachieve this". In the subsequent Dental Action Plan, \npublished In May 1994, the development of "oral \nhealth promotion and preventive programmes" was \nhighlighted. \nOral health promotion should follow the principles \ndefined in the W.H .O. Ottawa Charter (1986) for \nhealth promotion generally which Include creating \nhealthy public policy, creating supportive \nenvironments, strengthening community action, \ndeveloping personal skills and re-orientation of \ndental services. The W.H.O. 1997 Jakarta Declaration, \nwhile re-endorsing the principles of the Ottawa \nCharter, identifies the need to break through \ntraditional boundaries and for the creation of new \npartnerships for health between the different sectors \nat all levels of governance in societies. Health \npromotion is placed firmly at the centre of health \ndevelopment. As such, it is relevant for both \ndeveloping and developed countries. The Jakarta \nDeclaration identified five priorities for health \npromotion in the 21 st Century: \n• to promote social responsibility for health \n• to increase investments for health \ndevelopment \n• to consolidate and expand 'partnerships for \nhealth' \n• to increase community capacity and \n'empower' the individual in matters of health \n• to secure an infrastructure for health \npromotion
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.106 | 0.032 |
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".