MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2583039560 · doi:10.54656/gokh9495

The Co-produced Pathway to Impact Describes Knowledge Mobilization Processes

2016· article· en· W2583039560 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Phipps, Joanne Cummins, Debra Pepler, Wendy Craig, Shelley Cardinal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Engagement and Scholarship · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobilizationCommunity mobilizationPublic relationsNarrativeKnowledge managementCollaborative networkPolitical scienceKnowledge creationBusinessSociologyComputer scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge mobilization supports research collaborations between university and community partners which can maximize the impacts of research beyond the academy; however, models of knowledge mobilization are complex and create challenges for monitoring research impacts. This inability to sufficiently evaluate is particularly problematic for large collaborative research networks involving multiple partners and research institutions. The Co-produced Pathway to Impact simplifies many of the complex models of knowledge mobilization. It is a logic model based framework for mapping the progress of research -> dissemination -> uptake -> implementation -> impact. This framework is illustrated using collaborative research projects from Promoting Relationships and Eliminating Violence Network (PREVNet), a pan-Canadian community-university network engaging in knowledge mobilization to promote healthy relationships among children and youth and prevent bullying. The Co-produced Pathway to Impact illustrates that research impact occurs when university researchers collaborate with non-academic partners who produce the products, policies, and services that have impacts on the lives of end beneficiaries. Research impact is therefore measured at the level of non-academic partners and identified by surveying research partners to create narrative case studies of research impact.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0070.021
Scholarly communication0.0190.019
Open science0.0040.026
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.009

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 head0.332
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
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

Citations88
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Community Engagement and ScholarshipSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207