MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2969220405 · doi:10.14288/1.0380450

Strengthening networks to improve knowledge translation in paediatric healthcare

2019· article· en· W2969220405 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephanie Glegg

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careKnowledge translationBusinessMedicineKnowledge managementPublic relationsComputer sciencePolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Knowledge translation (KT), or the process of moving research into action, takes 10-20 years, resulting in sub-optimal healthcare for Canadians. Most KT strategies designed to shorten this gap neglect the social factors that facilitate research use. Social network analysis (SNA) methodology can be used to examine these factors within a network of individuals, including identifying influential people, and describing interaction patterns that can be targeted to improve KT efficiency. No such studies exist in paediatric healthcare organizations. Aims: 1) determine how SNA can augment KT research; 2) describe the national KT support context within paediatric healthcare and research organizations; and 3) confirm the influence of networks on KT, and identify network-driven KT support strategies. Methods: Study 1: Scoping review of SNA and theory applied to KT research. Study 2: Survey-based environmental scan of organizational KT supports in Canadian paediatric healthcare and research organizations. Study 3: Mixed-methods SNA descriptive case study of one healthcare-research organization dyad’s KT network using visual tools, and SNA survey and interview data from researchers, clinicians, leaders and KT support personnel to triangulate network influences on KT, and to identify network interventions to facilitate KT. Results: Study 1: SNA use is emerging in the KT field, primarily to examine information flow through cross-sectional survey research of physician-only networks, while analyzing few network properties. Diverse theoretical perspectives appear to be applicable for SNA research. Study 2: Organizational supports for KT typically targeted healthcare professionals, leaders and researchers, and included library services, KT support personnel, internal and external collaborations, forums and communication strategies, policies and protocols, consultation, specialized initiatives and funding. Study 3: Multiple network structures were perceived to influence KT. Reasons for network structure included individual attributes, relational considerations, and organizational context. Proposed network-driven KT support strategies included network development, communication, resources, personnel, visibly valuing KT, and evaluation. Conclusion: SNA can advance the science of KT by addressing the under-researched social determinants of evidence use, and by informing the design of network interventions. Participant engagement in applying a network perspective represented a novel application of SNA to KT research.

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)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.172
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.172
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0110.017
Open science0.0040.026
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.324
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.

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicHealth Sciences Research and Education→French-language works237,207→