MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968830885 · doi:10.1080/02701960802690233

Sustained Transfer of Knowledge to Practice in Long-Term Care: Facilitators and Barriers of a Mental Health Learning Initiative

2009· article· en· W1968830885 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Stolee, Carrie McAiney, Loretta M. Hillier, Diane Harris, Pam Hamilton, Linda Kessler, Victoria Madsen, J. Kenneth Le Clair

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology & Geriatrics Education · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonProvidence Health CareUniversity of WaterlooLawson Health Research InstituteMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingLong-term careSustainabilityMental healthAffect (linguistics)Knowledge transferResource (disambiguation)PsychologyMedicineKnowledge managementPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores facilitators and barriers to the impact and sustainability of a learning initiative to increase capacity of long-term care (LTC) homes to manage the mental health needs of older persons, through development of in-house Psychogeriatric Resource Persons (PRPs). Twenty interviews were conducted with LTC staff. Management support, particularly designation of time for PRP activities, development of PRP teams, and supportive learning strategies were significant factors affecting sustained knowledge transfer. Continuing education that is provided and evaluated on an ongoing basis, secures management commitment, is integrated within a broader system strategy, and provides on-the-job support has the greatest potential to affect care.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.387 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations39
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerontology & Geriatrics EducationSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207