MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118016334 · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-9-35

Supporting collaborative use of the diabetes population risk tool (DPoRT) in health-related practice: a multiple case study research protocol

2014· article· en· W2118016334 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Laura C. Rosella, Leslea Peirson, Catherine Bornbaum, Kathy Kotnowski, Michael Lebenbaum, Randy Fransoo, Patricia J. Martens, Patrícia Caetano, Carla Ens, Charles Gardner, David L. Mowat

Bibliographic record

VenueImplementation Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of OttawaUniversity of ManitobaManitoba HealthPublic Health OntarioMcMaster University Medical CentreBarrie Urology GroupMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsKnowledge translationHealth services researchMedicinePublic healthPopulation healthHealth informaticsHealth administrationHealth policyProtocol (science)PopulationKnowledge managementProcess managementMedical educationNursingEnvironmental healthComputer scienceBusinessAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Health policy makers have stated that diabetes prevention is a priority; however, the type, intensity, and target of interventions or policy changes that will achieve the greatest impact remains uncertain. In response to this uncertainty, the Diabetes Population Risk Tool (DPoRT) was developed and validated to estimate future diabetes risk based on routinely collected population data. To facilitate use of DPoRT, we partnered with regional and provincial health-related decision makers in Ontario and Manitoba, Canada. Primary objectives include: i) evaluate the effectiveness of partnerships between the research team and DPoRT users; ii) explore strategies that facilitate uptake and overcome barriers to DPoRT use; and iii) implement and evaluate the knowledge translation approach. METHODS: This protocol reflects an integrated knowledge translation (IKT) approach and corresponds to the action phase of the Knowledge-to-Action (KtoA) framework. Our IKT approach includes: employing a knowledge brokering team to facilitate relationships with DPoRT users (objective 1); tailored training for DPoRT users; assessment of barriers and facilitators to DPoRT use; and customized dissemination strategies to present DPoRT outputs to decision maker audiences (objective 2). Finally, a utilization-focused evaluation will assess the effectiveness and impact of the proposed KtoA process for DPoRT application (objective 3). This research design utilizes a multiple case study approach. Units of analyses consist of two public health units, one provincial health organization, and one provincial knowledge dissemination team whereby we will connect with multiple regional health authorities. Evaluation will be based on analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data collected from passive (e.g., observer notes) and active (e.g., surveys and interviews) methods. DISCUSSION: DPoRT offers an innovative way to make routinely collected population health data practical and meaningful for diabetes prevention planning and decision making. Importantly, we will evaluate the utility of the KtoA cycle for a novel purpose - the application of a tool. Additionally, we will evaluate this approach in multiple diverse settings, thus considering contextual factors. This research will offer insights into how knowledge translation strategies can support the use of population-based risk assessment tools to promote informed decision making in health-related settings.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.008
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.694
GPT teacher head0.774
Teacher spread0.081 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImplementation ScienceSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207