MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1517864971 · doi:10.1161/str.46.suppl_1.tp345

Abstract T P345: Knowledge Translation in Stroke Care in Toronto: Impact of member informed improvements to a Virtual Community of Practice

2015· article· en· W1517864971 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michelle Donald, Krystyna Skrabka, Gail Avinoam, Jacqueline Willems, Shelley Sharp, Elizabeth Linkewich

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreOntario Stroke Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge translationCognitive reframingFacilitationFormative assessmentKnowledge sharingValue (mathematics)MedicineKnowledge managementMedical educationPsychologyComputer scienceSocial psychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The Toronto Stroke Networks Virtual Community of Practice (VCoP) is a secure social media platform, part of an evidence-informed knowledge translation (KT) approach to bridge identified gaps in knowledge for successful implementation of stroke best practices. In 2014, a formative developmental evaluation examined members’ perspectives about the value of the VCoP. Key themes emerged: networking, response time, validation of practice, and prioritization of best practices. Themes informed subsequent improvements: enhanced search functions, ability to share documents within a discussion forum, and formal facilitation. Objective: To examine the impact of VCoP enhancements on KT using value cycles 1-5 of the Wenger (2011) model: 1.immediate value: activity / interactions 2.potential value: knowledge capital 3.applied value: changes in practice 4.realized value: performance improvement 5.reframing value: redefining success Methods: Each theme was explored to identify potential improvement opportunities. Discussion with developers informed feasibility. Three priorities were identified: enhanced search functions, ability to share documents within discussion forums, and formal facilitation to prompt discussion. VCoP members were informed of improvements. Qualitative (members’ narratives) and quantitative indicators (e.g. response times, number of discussion threads) were examined. Results: Preliminary results indicate that formal facilitation supports increased value in activity and interaction (Cycle 1) on the VCoP. Within the first month of formal facilitation, posts in discussion forums increased from 3.75/month (FY13/14) to 11; average response times decreased from 18 to 8 days. Early examination of narratives indicates themes aligning with Cycle 2: members express value in VCoP information. Further evaluation, in progress, examines the impact of improved search functions and document upload capabilities including analysis of themes aligning with the Wenger Cycles, number of uploaded documents, and search effectiveness. Conclusions: Member informed enhancements to the VCoP contribute to KT through enhanced activity, member interactions, and knowledge capital.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→