Bridging the gap between the conceptual and the practical – reflections on the opportunities and challenges of meaningful engagement of people with lived experience in the context of integrated community care.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Participants will explore the opportunities and challenges of meaningful engagement of people with lived experience in the context of integrated community care (ICC), through a dialogue with up to three innovative ICC practices whose central premise is the co-production of wellbeing. The dialogue will be further nourished through consideration of the recently co-developed World Health Organisation (WHO) Framework for Meaningful Engagement of People with Lived Experience of Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs), Mental Health and Neurological conditions. Context: There is ample evidence that integrated care is best suited to support those living with long-term chronic NCDs, mental health conditions and to those with medically complex needs. At the very core of ICC, lies the principle of co-developing health and wellbeing. Despite broad agreement around the benefits, there is a lack of clarity on how this is achieved and few examples of what this looks like in practice. The WHO is currently in the process of co-developing a Framework for Meaningful Engagement of People Living with NCDs, Mental Health and Neurological conditions. Complementing this is practical guidance being produced by the Transnational Forum for ICC (TransForm) based on a collection of experiences and reflections of innovative ICC practices around Europe and Canada on the meaningful engagement of people with lived experience. Key learning: The Framework will contribute to the advancement of understanding, knowledge and action on meaningful engagement and other related participatory approaches. The evidence base has been and will continue to driven by individuals with lived experience. The TransForm guidance on engaging people with lived experience will further help bridge the gap between the conceptual and the practical. Audience: All those seeking to better engage and co-produce services with people with lived experience but are not sure how to start and what this looks like in practice. Plan: 10 mins – Setting the scene Joint presentation (WHO/TransForm) 15 mins – Overview of three TransForm changemakers Brief presentations on each ICC practice, focusing on how they engage people with lived experience. 20 mins – Participants dialogue with the TransForm changemakers Participants will choose one of the three Changemakers to discuss opportunities and challenges of meaningful engagement of people with lived experience 5 mins – Summary feedback from each table Each group reports back the main opportunities and challenges identified through discussion 10 mins – Opportunities and challenges in the context of the WHO framework Jack Fisher will close the session tying back the opportunities and challenges to the WHO Framework How are you going to engage with the audience? Each group would have one Changemaker and one facilitator to ensure conversation centres around the question of: How can the WHO Framework and TransForm’s legacy support your practice? How are you going to summarize the take home messages? There will be short feedback from each table on main points discussed – the facilitation team will then write up the discussions into a short and accessible summary which will be shared through social media and integrated care networks.
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 | 0,055 | 0,050 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,024 | 0,068 |
| Communication savante | 0,022 | 0,024 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,044 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,013 | 0,026 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
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.
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 ».