MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4390939727 · doi:10.5334/ijic.icic23183

Empowering the voices of persons with disabilities: Co-creating and implementing a community engagement framework for inclusive program design and organizational development

2023· article· en· W4390939727 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Alana Armas, Joseph Fulton, Hayley R. Crooks, Gift Tshuma, Karen Whitehead-Lye, W. Francis Fung, Rambel Palsis, Tram Nguyen, Sasha Elford, Barbara Moore, Michelle Nelson

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueMental Health and Patient Involvement
Établissements canadiensUniversity of ManitobaSinai Health SystemMarch of Dimes Canada
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCommunity engagementPublic relationsPublic engagementBest practiceKnowledge managementPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Increasing efforts in public and patient engagement have resulted in several approaches, theories, models, and frameworks. While many of these efforts have merit, they tend to be designed for engagement in healthcare organizations and services, or research. Focusing on these specific areas is useful, but these approaches lack the contextual considerations community-based organizations must work through when looking to change or improve their engagement practices. March of Dimes Canada (MODC) is a complex national organization that serves people with disabilities, operating across multiple jurisdictions and health authorities to provide community health and social care services, conducts research, provides peer support programming, and engages in advocacy work. MODC recognizes the need to improve engagement practices across all aspects of the organization, however it is difficult to implement a single engagement model or framework consistently across the organization. For this reason, our study aimed to co-create a community engagement framework that is contextually relevant to MODC and our communities, supporting the improvement of engagement practices within all aspects of the organization. We are using a co-design approach to complete the study; inviting MODC’s clients, who are people with disabilities to participate as co-researchers in this work. The co-creation of the framework is currently underway and consists of three phases. Phase one included: conducting surveys, group interviews, and a document analysis of current organizational engagement practices. Phase two included: conducting an environmental scan of other community organizations’ engagement practices; and completing a rapid review to identify theories, models and frameworks for client and public engagement. Phase three, which is currently underway, includes establishing an advisory committee of individuals who: 1) reside in Canada, and 2) have experience living with a disability. The advisory committee will co-design the engagement framework and co-create the implementation materials and processes for the resulting framework. During this phase we will also convene working groups with specific populations (i.e., caregivers, youth and their families, frontline staff, management etc.) to review the framework for validation and further refinement. To date results from phase one have found Canadian non-profit organizations that provide services and supports for people with disabilities are moving towards including clients more meaningfully through advisory committees, having people with disabilities as board members, and moving away from the charitable model of disability and tokenism. Some barriers to meaningful client engagement include funding constraints, organizational policies, accessibility, and lack of action following client feedback. These findings, along with the rapid review findings will inform the engagement framework co-design with the advisory committee. This study can provide insight on the process of developing and implementing a contextually relevant engagement framework that guides more meaningful community engagement for program design, creating organizational policies, conducting research and advocacy activities, and strategic planning. The framework will be evaluated following its implementation for continuous refinement and improvement across all levels of the organization. There will also be ongoing knowledge translation and mobilization activities to share the process, experiences, and results from the framework development within the disability and non-profit communities.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,125
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,125
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,661

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,1250,055
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0080,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0210,035
Communication savante0,0190,016
Science ouverte0,0060,037
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,009
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,153
Tête enseignante GPT0,476
Écart entre enseignants0,323 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal of Integrated Care→Même sujetMental Health and Patient Involvement→Travaux en français237 207→