Analyzing the Barriers and Supports of Knowledge Translation Using the PEO Model
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Knowledge translation is a current and growing force in Canada's health care environment. PURPOSE: The intent of this paper is to examine current research related to barriers and facilitators of knowledge translation relevant to occupational therapy from the perspective of the person-environment-occupation (PEO) model. KEY ISSUES: Minimum competency and best practice are established drivers of research use in occupational therapy. Knowledge translation is not only complementary to these established drivers but offers a valuable contribution to the profession. Current research offers insight into the facilitators and obstacles of knowledge translation in occupational therapy, and the PEO model provides a framework for this analysis. IMPLICATIONS: Several influences across different levels of the practice system may facilitate or hinder knowledge translation. Awareness of the current research related to these influences, in concert with an awareness of individual circumstances, is an essential precursor to developing more effective knowledge translation strategies.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it