MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166731209 · doi:10.2522/ptj.20090408

Promoting the Use of Measurement Tools in Practice: A Mixed-Methods Study of the Activities and Experiences of Physical Therapist Knowledge Brokers

2010· article· en· W2166731209 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lisa Rivard, Dianne J Russell, Lori Roxborough, Marjolijn Ketelaar, Doreen J. Bartlett, Peter Rosenbaum

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityWestern UniversitySunny Hill Health Centre for ChildrenCentre for Disability Prevention and RehabilitationBrockhouse Institute for Materials Research
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPhysical therapistPsychologyPhysical therapyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The use of knowledge brokers (KBs) has been recommended as a mechanism to facilitate the use of research evidence in clinical practice. However, little has been written regarding the practical implementation of the KB role. OBJECTIVES: This article (1) describes the brokering activities of 24 pediatric physical therapist KBs (in Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia, Canada), and (2) reports KBs' perceptions of the utility of their role and their experiences with the brokering process. DESIGN: A mixed-methods research design was used in this investigation, which was part of a larger knowledge translation (KT) study that demonstrated the effectiveness of using KBs to implement a group of evidence-based measurement tools into practice. METHODS: The KBs completed weekly activity logs, which were summarized and described. Semi-structured telephone interviews with KBs were analyzed qualitatively to provide insight into their perceptions of their role and the brokering process. Major interview themes were identified and verified through member checking. RESULTS: Brokering activities varied considerably as KBs adapted to meet the needs of their colleagues. The KBs indicated that they highly valued the connection to the research community and spoke of the enthusiastic engagement of their physical therapist colleagues (and others in their organization) in the brokering process. They discussed the importance of understanding the practice context and organizational factors that could affect knowledge transfer. The KBs spoke of the need to dedicate time for the role and had a strong sense of the supports needed to implement a KB role in future. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable variation in brokering activities was demonstrated across KB participants. The KBs perceived their role as useful and indicated that organizational commitment is crucial to the success of this KT strategy.

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)0.081
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0810.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.347
GPT teacher head0.578
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations79
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207