MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586667947 · doi:10.1186/s12982-017-0056-4

Participatory epidemiology: the contribution of participatory research to epidemiology

2017· review· en· W2586667947 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M Bach, Susanne Jordan, Susanne Härtung, Claudia Hövener, Michael T. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging Themes in Epidemiology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of AlbertaUniversität BielefeldBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungPublic Health AgencyRobert Koch InstitutKoch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
KeywordsParticipatory action researchCitizen journalismEpidemiologyPublic healthContext (archaeology)PopulationGrey literatureMedicineData scienceSociologyMEDLINEEnvironmental healthComputer sciencePolitical scienceGeographyWorld Wide WebNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Epidemiology has contributed in many ways to identifying various risk factors for disease and to promoting population health. However, there is a continuing debate about the ability of epidemiology not only to describe, but also to provide results which can be better translated into public health practice. It has been proposed that participatory research approaches be applied to epidemiology as a way to bridge this gap between description and action. A systematic account of what constitutes participatory epidemiology practice has, however, been lacking. METHODS: A scoping review was carried out focused on the question of what constitutes participatory approaches to epidemiology for the purpose of demonstrating their potential for advancing epidemiologic research. Relevant databases were searched, including both the published and non-published (grey) literature. The 102 identified sources were analyzed in terms of comparing common epidemiologic approaches to participatory counterparts regarding central aspects of the research process. Exemplary studies applying participatory approaches were examined more closely. RESULTS: A highly diverse, interdisciplinary body of literature was synthesized, resulting in a framework comprised of seven aspects of the research process: research goal, research question, population, context, data synthesis, research management, and dissemination of findings. The framework specifies how participatory approaches not only differ from, but also how they can enhance common approaches in epidemiology. Finally, recommendations for the further development of participatory approaches are given. These include: enhancing data collection, data analysis, and data validation; advancing capacity building for research at the local level; and developing data synthesis. CONCLUSION: The proposed framework provides a basis for systematically developing the emergent science of participatory epidemiology.

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)0.364
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.305
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3640.305
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0130.010
Science and technology studies0.0130.089
Scholarly communication0.0250.027
Open science0.0060.034
Research integrity0.0110.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.980
GPT teacher head0.829
Teacher spread0.151 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations75
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerging Themes in EpidemiologySame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207