MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809120120 · doi:10.1186/s12978-018-0538-z

Overcoming challenges to dissemination and implementation of research findings in under-resourced countries

2018· article· en· W2809120120 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Richard J. Derman, Frances J. Jaeger

Bibliographic record

VenueReproductive Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsPublic relationsHappinessKnowledge translationPsychological interventionDeveloping countryInformation DisseminationHealth careMedicineBusinessPolitical scienceKnowledge managementEconomic growthNursingComputer scienceEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Louis Pasteur once commented on the happiness that a scientist finds when, besides making a discovery, study results find practical application. Where health status is poor and resources are limited, finding such applications is a necessity, not merely a joy.Dissemination, or the distribution of new knowledge gained through research, is essential to the ethical conduct of research. Further, when research is designed to improve health, dissemination is critical to the development of evidence-based medicine and the adoption of evidence-supported interventions and improved practice patterns within specific settings. When dissemination is lacking, research may be considered a waste of resources and a useless pursuit unable to influence positive health outcomes.Effective translation of the findings of health research into policy and the practice of medicine has been slow in many countries considered low or lower middle-income (as defined by the World Bank). This is because such countries often have health care systems that are under-resourced (e.g., lacking personnel or facilities) and thus insufficiently responsive to health needs of their populations. However, implementation research has produced many tools and strategies that can prompt more effective and timelier application of research findings to real world situations.A conscientious researcher can find many suggestions for improving the integration of research evidence into practice. First and foremost, the truthful reporting of results is emphasized as essential because both studies with desirable findings as well those with less than ideal results can provide new and valuable knowledge. Consideration in advance of the audience likely to be interested in study findings can result in suitable packaging and targeted communication of results. Other strategies for avoiding the barriers that can negatively impact implementation of research evidence include the early involvement of stakeholders as research is being designed and discussion before initiation of proposed research with those who will be affected by it. It is also important to recognize the role of education and training for ensuring the skills and knowledge needed for not only the conduct of high quality research but also for the meaningful promotion of results and application of research findings to achieve intended purposes.

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)0.734
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.791
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.7340.791
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0100.044
Scholarly communication0.0310.050
Open science0.0130.053
Research integrity0.0370.057
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.564
GPT teacher head0.715
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
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

Citations41
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproductive HealthSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207