MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005155050 · doi:10.1002/chp.20124

Knowledge Translation Research: The Science of Moving Research Into Policy and Practice

2011· review· en· W2005155050 on OpenAlexaff
Janet Curran, Jeremy Grimshaw, Jill A. Hayden, Barbara Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge translationScope (computer science)Knowledge baseKnowledge managementHealth careSociology of scientific knowledgeEngineering ethicsReflection (computer programming)Medical educationSociologyMedicinePolitical scienceComputer scienceEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research findings will not change health outcomes unless health care organizations, systems, and professionals adopt them in practice. Knowledge translation research is the scientific study of the methods to promote the uptake of research findings by patients, health care providers, managers, and policy makers. Many forms of enquiry addressing different questions are needed to develop the evidence base for knowledge translation. In this paper we will present a description of the broad scope of knowledge translation research with a reflection on activities needed to further develop the science of knowledge translation. Consideration of some of the shared research challenges facing the fields of knowledge translation and continuing professional development will also be presented.

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)0.181
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.325
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1810.325
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.003
Bibliometrics0.0130.015
Science and technology studies0.0040.030
Scholarly communication0.0190.028
Open science0.0040.014
Research integrity0.0130.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.742
GPT teacher head0.726
Teacher spread0.016 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations136
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Continuing Education in the Health ProfessionsSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207