MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327325096 · doi:10.1037/hea0000113

Narrative as a knowledge translation tool for facilitating impact: Translating physical activity knowledge to disabled people and health professionals.

2014· article· en· W2327325096 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMcMaster University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaOntario Neurotrauma Foundation
KeywordsNarrativeKnowledge translationThematic analysisPsychologyContext (archaeology)Narrative inquiryPopulationQualitative researchMedical educationMedicineSociologyKnowledge managementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Theoretically informed by narrative inquiry, this article examines the utility of stories as a possible tool for disseminating synthesized physical activity knowledge to adults with spinal cord injury (SCI) and health care professionals (HCPs) working with this population. It is the first research to systematically examine in this context the use of narratives as a knowledge translation tool. METHOD: Forty-three participants (15 adults with SCI; 13 peer mentors with SCI; and 15 HCPs) individually listened to an evidence-based story set in a rehabilitation hospital about the process of becoming physically active following SCI. Individual telephone interviews were conducted to examine participants' perceptions of the story. Qualitative data were analyzed using a thematic analysis. RESULTS: Five themes were inductively identified: (a) effective communication, (b) narrative authenticity, (c) credible messengers, (d) narrative format, and (e) narrative as a form of action. Together, the themes reveal that the story had utility, the various attributes that help explain why this is case, how the utility might be maximized, what the stories could do on and for people, and how the narratives can be used to support behavior change. CONCLUSIONS: The article advances knowledge by revealing the value of narrative as a means for disseminating evidence-based information to people with SCI and to HCPs. It also reveals that stories can be used to facilitate dialogue, teach, remind, reassure, and reinvigorate people. This article is a resource for enabling knowledge to be more effectively shared to different audiences and applying what we know in practice to help people live meaningful lives.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.408 · 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