MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612680643 · doi:10.15402/esj.v2i2.165

Towards a Theory of Change for Community-based Research Projects

2017· article· en· W2612680643 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEngaged Scholar Journal Community-Engaged Research Teaching and Learning · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsCentre for Community Based Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheory of changeSummitExcellenceOrder (exchange)SociologyEngineering ethicsManagement sciencePolitical scienceEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to present a preliminary theory of change for community-based research projects. The theory of change emerged from a Canadian Summit titled, “Pursuing Excellence in Collaborative Community-Campus Research.” The article begins by providing a rationale for why a theory of change could be helpful to advance the agenda of community-based research (i.e., concept clarification, guide to action, and quality assessment). Next we describe how our preliminary theory of change was developed, before outlining the theory of change under the headings of activities, intended outcomes, and sample indicators. We conclude by discussing what is needed in order to deepen our understanding of the theory of change for community-based research projects.

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.

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)0.958
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.678
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.9580.678
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.8380.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.798
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 head0.879
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.279 · 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