Contribution of participatory action research to knowledge mobilization in mental health services for children and families
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
Problems with knowledge mobilization (KMb) (also known as knowledge translation and implementation science) among providers of children and youth services may be addressed by looking to models of participatory action research (PAR) that are already familiar to those working in community-based services. In contexts such as these, where there is mistrust of traditional sources of expertise, PAR has the potential to provide a way to make it easier for the sharing and adoption of new practices. A case example of an evaluation of a community-based gang prevention program for children aged 9–14 is used to highlight how PAR can enhance program design and implementation based on the sharing of best practices and the active engagement of community members through a research advisory committee. This integration of PAR with KMb, though an imperfect attempt to share practice evidence, provides clues to the methodological techniques required for more participatory development and exchange of promising practices among providers of services for children and youth.
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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