MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788899678 · doi:10.1186/s13012-018-0711-3

Training scholars in dissemination and implementation research for cancer prevention and control: a mentored approach

2018· article· en· W2788899678 on OpenAlexaff
Margaret Padek, Nageen Mir, Rebekah R. Jacob, David Chambers, Maureen Dobbins, Karen M. Emmons, Jon Kerner, Shiriki Kumanyika, Christine Pfund, Enola K. Proctor, Kurt C. Stange, Ross C. Brownson

Bibliographic record

VenueImplementation Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicInterdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthInstitute of Clinical and Translational SciencesU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsWorkforceMedical educationMedicineBaseline (sea)Health services researchNursing researchHealth informaticsCancer preventionFocus groupProgram evaluationPublic healthNursingCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: As the field of D&I (dissemination and implementation) science grows to meet the need for more effective and timely applications of research findings in routine practice, the demand for formalized training programs has increased concurrently. The Mentored Training for Dissemination and Implementation Research in Cancer (MT-DIRC) Program aims to build capacity in the cancer control D&I research workforce, especially among early career researchers. This paper outlines the various components of the program and reports results of systematic evaluations to ascertain its effectiveness. METHODS: Essential features of the program include selection of early career fellows or more experienced investigators with a focus relevant to cancer control transitioning to a D&I research focus, a 5-day intensive training institute, ongoing peer and senior mentoring, mentored planning and work on a D&I research proposal or project, limited pilot funding, and training and ongoing improvement activities for mentors. The core faculty and staff members of the MT-DIRC program gathered baseline and ongoing evaluation data regarding D&I skill acquisition and mentoring competency through participant surveys and analyzed it by iterative collective reflection. RESULTS: A majority (79%) of fellows are female, assistant professors (55%); 59% are in allied health disciplines, and 48% focus on cancer prevention research. Forty-three D&I research competencies were assessed; all improved from baseline to 6 and 18 months. These effects were apparent across beginner, intermediate, and advanced initial D&I competency levels and across the competency domains. Mentoring competency was rated very highly by the fellows--higher than rated by the mentors themselves. The importance of different mentoring activities, as rated by the fellows, was generally congruent with their satisfaction with the activities, with the exception of relatively greater satisfaction with the degree of emotional support and relatively lower satisfaction for skill building and opportunity initially. CONCLUSIONS: These first years of MT-DIRC demonstrated the program's ability to attract, engage, and improve fellows' competencies and skills and implement a multicomponent mentoring program that was well received. This account of the program can serve as a basis for potential replication and evolution of this model in training future D&I science researchers.

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)0.377
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.277
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3770.277
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0060.016
Scholarly communication0.0190.015
Open science0.0080.028
Research integrity0.0070.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.392
GPT teacher head0.669
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations79
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImplementation ScienceSame topicInterdisciplinary Research and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207