Client and family engagement in rehabilitation research: a framework for health care organizations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the development and implementation of an organizational framework for client and family-centered research. METHOD: Case report. RESULTS: While patient-centered care is now well established, patient-centered research remains underdeveloped. This is particularly true at the organizational level (e.g., hospital based research institutes). In this paper we describe the development of an organizational framework for client and family centered research at Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital in Toronto, Canada. CONCLUSION: It is our hope that, by sharing our framework other research institutions can learn from our experience and develop their own research patient/client/family engagement programs. Implications for rehabilitation Family engagement in rehabilitation research •Rehabilitation research is crucial to the development and improvement of rehabilitative care. •The relevance, appropriateness, and accountability of research to patients, clients and families could be improved. •Engaging clients and families as partners in all aspects of the research process is one way to address this problem. •In this paper, we describe a framework for engaging clients and families in research at the organizational level.
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 | 0.213 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.093 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.028 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.024 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".