MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2727951247 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igx004.4882

INTERINSTITUTIONAL RELOCATIONS: DEVELOPING GUIDELINES AND MOBILIZING KNOWLEDGE

2017· article· en· W2727951247 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lupin Battersby, Sarah L. Canham, Mei Lan Fang, Daniela Krahn, Andrew Sixsmith

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelocationAccommodationRedevelopmentPresentation (obstetrics)OutreachBridging (networking)BusinessKnowledge translationBest practiceNursingRelevance (law)Public relationsMedical educationMedicineKnowledge managementPsychologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasingly, long-term care (LTC) facilities need redevelopment due to the complexity of resident care needs and to meet higher standards of accommodation. Redevelopments require relocation of staff and residents en masse. While significant literature exists on the negative health and well-being outcomes of older adults’ relocation from their private homes into care homes, less research has focused on the relocation of staff and residents together from one LTC facility to another following construction of a replacement facility. This presentation will report on an integrated knowledge translation (KT) project that developed guidelines through active collaboration with a LTC provider, a synthesis review of the literature, deliberative dialogues with stakeholders across Canada, and comprehensive dissemination. Engaging knowledge users throughout the project contributed to the relevance and impact of the guidelines. Using this research as a case example, the challenges and strategies for bridging research and practice through integrated KT will be discussed.

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)0.129
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.179
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1290.179
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0100.015
Scholarly communication0.0140.015
Open science0.0070.024
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.230
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.278 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207