MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560574590

Bench, Bedside, Curbside, and Home: Translational Research to Include Transformative Change Using Educational Research

2016· article· en· W2560574590 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christoper Felege, Emily Clare Hahn, Cheryl Hunter, Rebecca Gleditsch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of research practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranslational researchBench to bedsideTransformative learningTranslational scienceMedicineMedical educationTranslational medicinePopulationPsychologyEngineering ethicsPublic relationsPolitical sciencePedagogyEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Translational research originated in the medical field during the 1990s to describe taking discovery based research through the steps of applying it to clinical research and patient-oriented care. This model is implicitly linear, depicting the flow of information from researchers’ bench, to a clinical trial bedside, to a primary care physician’s practice. The prevailing model of translational research, referred to as “Bench to Bedside to Curbside,” is limited in that it does not adequately incorporate stakeholders outside of the professional or research community because Curbside refers to physician care delivered to patients. This omits the transformative impact that research can have on the general populace if implemented through educational research, disseminating knowledge to people who can use it. In this article we argue that a fourth category needs to be incorporated into the previous T1-T3 Bench to Bedside to Curbside model, and this fourth category represents T4, “Home.” We seek to further define and describe, while providing a new model for translational research that is more circular in nature and inclusive of the general populace. We also suggest that the incorporation of educational researchers and practitioners would expand the current collaborative nature of translational research and is a way to expand the translational model. This promises more adequate, effective, and sustainable impacts on a target population.

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)0.071
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0710.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.094
Scholarly communication0.0210.036
Open science0.0040.019
Research integrity0.0170.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.730
GPT teacher head0.665
Teacher spread0.065 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of research practiceSame topicHealth and Medical Research ImpactsFrench-language works237,207