MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Canadian True NTH Initiative: A multisite intervention to improve the lives of men with prostate cancer.

2016· article· en· W2591428992 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julie Gilbert, Matthew George, Elilzabeth D. Huggins, Maureen E. Rowlands

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsProstate Cancer CanadaCancer Care Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionMedicineProstate cancerMedical educationNarrativeIntervention (counseling)Program evaluationPlan (archaeology)Public relationsNursingPolitical scienceCancerPublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

118 Background: The True NTH Initiative aims to improve the lives and experiences of men with prostate cancer, as well as those of their partners, family and caregivers. In Canada, Prostate Cancer Canada selected ten teams to develop, implement and evaluate evidence-informed programs focusing on decision support, clinical support, lifestyle management, education, social support, navigation and treatment follow-up. Project teams were encouraged to align their local evaluations with a common evaluation framework and a national evaluation plan was developed. The aim of this abstract is to share methodology and early results of a multi-level evaluation that will address a range of programs designed to improve the lives of men with prostate cancer. True NTH is funded globally by the Movember Foundation, and operates in Canada, USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland and Singapore. Methods: Projects (Solutions) selected for the initiative had existing evidence for their efficacy. Project teams were responsible for designing the implementation of their Solution and an appropriate evaluation. Local and national evaluations used a recognized framework (RE-AIM) to systematically study the real world uptake of these interventions, focusing on questions of Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance. Project teams provide quarterly narrative updates and annual written reports with quantitative measures and narrative components. Key informant interviews with project leads will complete the final national evaluation. Results: To date, projects have generated learning across different provincial health systems, academic institutions and community settings. Teams have learned to address challenges of participant recruitment and project endorsement, and have begun to appreciate the benefits of collaboration. Teams have also reflected on the importance of engaging clinicians in the implementation of their Solutions for effective uptake and sustainability. Conclusions: The results of the ongoing multi-level evaluation continue to provide insight into real world implementation of evidence-informed programs and the critical factors that enable their effectiveness.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.249
GPT teacher head0.576
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207