MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065477583 · doi:10.2196/jmir.3881

Knowledge Translation in Men’s Health Research: Development and Delivery of Content for Use Online

2015· article· en· W2065477583 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Maria Lohan, Áine Aventin, John L. Oliffe, Christina Han, Joan L. Bottorff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Internet Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFocus Groups and Qualitative Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPublic Health Research ProgrammeEconomic and Social Research CouncilPublic Health AgencyHealth Service Executive
KeywordsKnowledge translationCurriculumReproductive healthPsychologyMedical educationMedicinePublic relationsComputer scienceKnowledge managementPolitical sciencePedagogyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Men can be hard to reach with face-to-face health-related information, while increasingly, research shows that they are seeking health information from online sources. Recognizing this trend, there is merit in developing innovative online knowledge translation (KT) strategies capable of translating research on men's health into engaging health promotion materials. While the concept of KT has become a new mantra for researchers wishing to bridge the gap between research evidence and improved health outcomes, little is written about the process, necessary skills, and best practices by which researchers can develop online knowledge translation. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to illustrate some of the processes and challenges involved in, and potential value of, developing research knowledge online to promote men's health. METHODS: We present experiences of KT across two case studies of men's health. First, we describe a study that uses interactive Web apps to translate knowledge relating to Canadian men's depression. Through a range of mechanisms, study findings were repackaged with the explicit aim of raising awareness and reducing the stigma associated with men's depression and/or help-seeking. Second, we describe an educational resource for teenage men about unintended pregnancy, developed for delivery in the formal Relationship and Sexuality Education school curricula of Ireland, Northern Ireland (United Kingdom), and South Australia. The intervention is based around a Web-based interactive film drama entitled "If I Were Jack". RESULTS: For each case study, we describe the KT process and strategies that aided development of credible and well-received online content focused on men's health promotion. In both case studies, the original research generated the inspiration for the interactive online content and the core development strategy was working with a multidisciplinary team to develop this material through arts-based approaches. In both cases also, there is an acknowledgment of the need for gender and culturally sensitive information. Both aimed to engage men by disrupting stereotypes about men, while simultaneously addressing men through authentic voices and faces. Finally, in both case studies we draw attention to the need to think beyond placement of content online to delivery to target audiences from the outset. CONCLUSIONS: The case studies highlight some of the new skills required by academics in the emerging paradigm of translational research and contribute to the nascent literature on KT. Our approach to online KT was to go beyond dissemination and diffusion to actively repackage research knowledge through arts-based approaches (videos and film scripts) as health promotion tools, with optimal appeal, to target male audiences. Our findings highlight the importance of developing a multidisciplinary team to inform the design of content, the importance of adaptation to context, both in terms of the national implementation context and consideration of gender-specific needs, and an integrated implementation and evaluation framework in all KT work.

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)0.098
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.170
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0980.170
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.006

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 head0.888
GPT teacher head0.657
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Internet ResearchSame topicFocus Groups and Qualitative MethodsFrench-language works237,207