Notice bibliographique
Résumé
One of the most exciting sessions at the III Step Conference took place on the last day. Among the presenters, Carol Richards, (JNPT's own consulting Editor) presented the Canadian experience with knowledge translation (KT). She defined KT as “turning the best evidence into practice” and described the Canadian Stroke Network, in which dozens of clinicians and scientists work together standardizing care delivery and documentation. We were on the edge of our seats as she described the program and shared some of the online resources for efficient evidence retrieval. Many in the room lamented the fact that they were not in Canada, working in such a cohesive rehabilitation care delivery system. Some fantasized about sabbaticals in Canada. Others began to brainstorm about how we could learn from our Canadian colleagues and create our own efforts at KT. Those of us from JNPT were strategizing about how to best deliver the journal content to our colleagues in research, education, and practice. How could we create opportunities to discuss, digest, and ultimately, apply the findings reported in the journal and other literatures relevant to our specialization. Our first attempt at KT is now a reality. The March 2006 issue of JNPT features podcasts of each article's abstract. JNPT has joined with Science Audio productions introducing this innovation into publication. In fact, we are the only journal indexed in MEDLINE that provides such a service. Yes, I guess we are very excited about this development. Here is how it works: On the on-line March JNPT table of contents for each article there is an icon symbol that allows you to select a MP3 file. You can download the file into your MP3 player, computer, or ipod. While you are multi-tasking you can listen to the abstract of each article and decide if you want to read the entire thing. That is not all. We will also have abstracts, as well as commentaries and discussions with the authors. In this issue, the lead article by Perry and colleagues is commented on by a scientist and a clinician. They converse with the author about the relevance of the findings to practice!SymbolThere is more. We have also included in the March issue companion videos. This is not an innovation as we appended videos to our issue on technology published over 3 years ago. It is however a re-statement of how important it is for the journal to use technology to enhance KT. The video connected to the March JNPT issue complements the article on Taiji buddies and PD. Examples of the Taiji forms are included as figures in the print version and videos are found on the on-line version of JNPT. We are planning many more forums where our authors and readers can interact. Now that we have a mechanism for KT, we look forward to submissions that will indeed be regarded as best evidence.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,054 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,012 | 0,014 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,088 | 0,052 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».