Introducing the Canadian Thoracic Society Framework for Guideline Dissemination and Implementation, with Concurrent Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) is leveraging its strengths in guideline production to enable respiratory guideline implementation in Canada. The authors describe the new CTS Framework for Guideline Dissemination and Implementation, with Concurrent Evaluation, which has three spheres of action: guideline production, implementation infrastructure and knowledge translation (KT) methodological support. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research 'Knowledge-to-Action' process was adopted as the model of choice for conceptualizing KT interventions. Within the framework, new evidence for formatting guideline recommendations to enhance the intrinsic implementability of future guidelines were applied. Clinical assemblies will consider implementability early in the guideline production cycle when selecting clinical questions, and new practice guidelines will include a section dedicated to KT. The framework describes the development of a web-based repository and communication forum to inventory existing KT resources and to facilitate collaboration and communication among implementation stakeholders through an online discussion board. A national forum for presentation and peer-review of proposed KT projects is described. The framework outlines expert methodological support for KT planning, development and evaluation including a practical guide for implementers and a novel 'Clinical Assembly-KT Action Team', and in-kind logistical support and assistance in securing peer-reviewed funding.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.357 | 0.340 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".