Knowledge Diffusion in Social Work: A New Approach to Bridging the Gap
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
The continuing gap between research and practice has long been a problem in social work. A great deal of the empirical practice literature has emphasized practice evaluation (usually in the form of single-case methodologies) at the expense of research dissemination and utilization. An alternative focus for social work researchers can be found in the extensive theoretical and research literature on knowledge diffusion, technology transfer, and social marketing. Knowledge diffusion and social marketing theory is explored in terms of its relevance to social work education and practice, including a consideration of issues of culture and power. The authors present an integrated dissemination model for social work and use a case example to illustrate the practical application of the model. The OPTIONS (OutPatient Treatment In ONtario Services) project is an example of the effective dissemination of two research-based addiction treatment modalities to nearly 1,000 direct practice clinicians in Ontario, Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 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 | 0.003 |
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