MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023824609 · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002293.135

P041 Sustaining organizational capacities of knowledge utilization: A complete toolbox for the health and social services organizations

2013· article· en· W2023824609 on OpenAlexaff
François Chagnon, Cécile Bardon, Nathalie Houlfort, Roland Proulx, Préscilla Labelle, M Gervais

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Quality & Safety · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsToolboxMedicineKnowledge managementProcess managementPublic relationsBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Despite research and funding, the understanding of organization’s capacities of knowledge utilisation remains incomplete in health and social field. Objectives To better understand organisational determinants of research result utilisation. Method Between 2009 and 2012, managers (n = 75) from health and social services organisations (N = 8) have actively contributed in a participative research action process. Additionally professionals and managers (N = 2161) have answered questionnaires. Qualitative and quantitative data gathered on the organisational outcomes as well as on the process of using our tool provided empirical validation. This iterative process led to the creation of a complete toolbox designed to help organisations raise to the knowledge transfer and utilisation challenge. Results The toolbox includes a conceptual framework, a user’s guide and two questionnaires to establish a diagnostic of the organisation’s capacities of knowledge utilisation and to identify the main strategies to improve them. At the root of our toolbox is a theoretical model of organisational capacities to use knowledge, specific to health and social services organisations, that we have developed. Our model includes eight components: organisational culture, vision and leadership, knowledge acquisition, reflexivity, integration, creation and dissemination, adaptation, and relationships. Discussion The results demonstrate that the toolbox helps decision makers to develop a common understanding of their organisation’s strengths and weaknesses in terms of research knowledge utilisation capacities. Implications:The research and toolbox developed by our team provide a first step in unveiling the intricacies of knowledge utilisation in the social services sector. Eight key organisational capacities were found to be essential in facilitating and promoting knowledge utilisation in health and social services.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.014
Scholarly communication0.0170.021
Open science0.0030.016
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.365 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Quality & SafetySame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207