Knowledge Translation Capacity of Arts-informed Dissemination: A Narrative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Arts-informed dissemination is an expanding approach to enhancing knowledge translation in the health sciences. Problematic is the minimal evaluation studies and the rare reporting of the influencing factors of knowledge translation. “The 7,024th Patient” is a research-derived art installation created to disseminate findings about patients’ experiences of heart surgery and the importance of humanistic patient-centred care approaches. The current study’s purpose was to explore how arts-informed dissemination (i.e., “The 7,024th Patient”) influenced healthcare practitioners’ delivery of care.Methods: An arts-informed narrative study was guided by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework. The sample included a multi-disciplinary group of 19 individuals who worked with patients undergoing and recovering from heart surgery. Two interviews were conducted with each participant at the time of viewing the installation and 6 months later. A narrative analysis was conducted using Pictorial Narrative Mapping techniques.Results: Study findings indicated that the arts as a form of evidence provide an experiential and aesthetic encounter, which stimulated reflective practice. Participants’ accounts reflected cognitive and behavioral modifications related to empathy, holistic approaches and relational care. However, the complexities associated with the interpretive process and the influencing knowledge translation elements indicated a need to dialogue about the translation process, including deconstructing the evidence within the context of one’s own practice.Conclusions: Art is not just works of beauty or eccentric paintings. There is an imaginative and aesthetic capacity that can be cultivated with diligence, creativity, and rigour in the world of healthcare research and knowledge translation. Next steps require the examination of the knowledge translation capacity of different art forms with a range of populations and disciplines. Additionally, this study suggests the need to explore arts-informed dissemination that draws upon a more dialogical intervention in which knowledge users are involved in the interpretive processes of knowledge translation.
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 | 0.039 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".