Exploring the divide between dental clinicians and academics for more inclusive partnerships: perspectives on building a research network
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Dentists experience barriers of applying knowledge at point of care. In recent years, integrated knowledge translation (IKT) efforts, such as dental practice research networks, have been established in the US and other countries to overcome the potential barriers to dental clinicians being involved in research. In Canada, there is no formal network. The objective of this study was to explore the perceptions of dental clinicians and academics in building a network in Ontario that would encourage research collaboration. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect data from dental clinicians and academics in Ontario dental schools. Purposeful sampling was used to recruit participants from the Faculty of Dentistry at the University of Toronto and Schulich School of Dentistry at Western University. Interviews were conducted via Zoom meetings between July and November 2023. Interviews were recorded, de-identified, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Strategies to promote rigour were applied throughout the research process. RESULTS: Twenty-six interviews were conducted (twelve dental clinicians and fourteen academics). Most participants described a divide impacting many aspects of oral health research. This divide appeared to be originating from historical cultural norms rooted in the development of organized dentistry in Ontario, current financial strains faced by dentists, and misalignment of values that resulted in miscommunications between dental clinicians and academics. Despite the divide, there appeared to be a strong desire among participants to "bridge the divide". Suggestions included starting a small network of interested individuals, enforcing existing collaborations within the universities, identifying champions in organized dentistry to advocate for establishing a formal network in Ontario, and exploring opportunities to support such a network in Canada. DISCUSSION: Despite the divide between dental clinicians and academics in oral health research, there appeared to be a strong desire to bridge the divide. This study is novel in that it reports dental clinicians' and academics' perceptions and experiences with IKT partnerships in dentistry. We offer recommendations for oral health professional leaders to build a new network.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,013 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».