MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967933317 · doi:10.33524/cjar.v18i1.320

THE ROLE OF KNOWLEDGE BROKERS: LESSONS FROM A COMMUNITY BASED RESEARCH STUDY OF CULTURAL SAFETY IN RELATION TO PEOPLE WHO USE DRUGS

2017· article· en· W2967933317 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jane McCall, Ashley Mollison, Annette J. Browne, Joanne Parker, Bernie Pauly

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Action Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivilege (computing)Cultural competencePsychologyNursingMedical educationMedicinePublic relationsPolitical sciencePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study explored cultural safety as a strategy to address the stigma of substance use in acute care settings. Two research team members took on the role of knowledge brokers (KBs) in order to liaise between the research team and two distinct research advisory groups: one with people who use drugs and the other nurses. The KBs were instrumental in ensuring that the research process and outcomes reflected the needs, experiences and aspirations of people who use or have used illicit drugs, and the nurses providing care in hospitals as well as bridging differences in power and privilege between team members and advisory groups.

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)0.160
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.192
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1600.192
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0480.051
Scholarly communication0.0230.034
Open science0.0080.029
Research integrity0.0120.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.864
GPT teacher head0.728
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Action ResearchSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207