MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1758683487 · doi:10.1186/s12912-015-0097-3

British Columbia Healthy Connections Project process evaluation: a mixed methods protocol to describe the implementation and delivery of the Nurse-Family Partnership in Canada

2015· article· en· W1758683487 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Susan M. Jack, Debbie Sheehan, Andrea González, Harriet L. MacMillan, Nicole Catherine, Charlotte Waddell

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Nursing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityMcMaster University
FundersPublic Health AgencySimon Fraser UniversityCanada Research ChairsMinistry of Children and Family Development, British ColumbiaPublic Health Agency of CanadaYork UniversityMcMaster University
KeywordsGeneral partnershipMedicineProtocol (science)Nursing researchNursing managementNursingHealth administrationProcess (computing)Health informaticsProcess managementPublic healthAlternative medicineComputer scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Nurse-Family Partnership is a home visitation program for first-time, socially and economically disadvantaged mothers. The effectiveness of this public health intervention has been well established in the United States; however, whether the same beneficial outcomes will be obtained within the Canadian context is unknown. As part of the British Columbia Healthy Connections Project, which includes a trial comparing Nurse-Family Partnership's effectiveness with existing services in British Columbia, we are conducting a process evaluation to describe and explain how the intervention is implemented and delivered across five regional Health Authorities. METHODS: A convergent parallel mixed methods research design will be used to address the process evaluation objectives. The principles of interpretive description will guide all sampling, data collection and analytic decisions in the qualitative component of the study. The full population of public health nurses and supervisors (n = 71) will discuss their experiences of implementing and delivering the program in interviews (or focus groups). Managers (n = 5-15) responsible for this portfolio will also be interviewed annually. Fidelity reports with quantitative data on the reach and the dose of the intervention will be collected and analyzed. Summaries of team meetings and supervisory sessions will be analyzed. Data will be used to compare, corroborate and explain results and variances across the five regional Health Authorities. DISCUSSION: The process evaluation results will be of immediate instrumental use to the program implementers to inform intervention delivery. Findings will contribute to the emerging body of evidence surrounding: 1) professional nurse home visitation practice issues; 2) best practices for meeting the needs of families living in rural and remote communities; 3) a deeper understanding of how health and social issues such as mental health problems including substance misuse and exposure to intimate partner violence affect a young mother's capacity to parent; and 4) strategies to support professionals from the primary care, public health and child welfare sectors to work collaboratively to meet the needs of children and families who are at risk or experiencing maltreatment.

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)0.160
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.077
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1600.077
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0150.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0070.007
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.004

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 head0.291
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations28
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC NursingSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207