MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003132063 · doi:10.1186/s12961-019-0521-3

Building an integrated knowledge translation (IKT) evidence base: colloquium proceedings and research direction

2020· letter· en· W3003132063 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Laura Boland, Anita Kothari, Chris McCutcheon, Ian D. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Research Policy and Systems · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa HospitalWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsKnowledge translationKnowledge managementGeneral partnershipHealth services researchKnowledge sharingField (mathematics)Relevance (law)CLARITYKnowledge baseComputer scienceSociologyPolitical scienceWorld Wide WebHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) is a model of research co-production, whereby researchers partner with knowledge users throughout the research process and who can use the research recommendations in practice or policy. IKT approaches are used to improve the relevance and impact of research. As an emerging field, however, the evidence underpinning IKT is in active development. The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network represents a collaborative interdisciplinary team that aims to advance the state of IKT science. METHODS: In 2017, the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network issued a call to its members for concept papers to further define IKT, outline an IKT research agenda, and inform the Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network's special meeting entitled, Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium, in Ottawa, Canada (2018). At the colloquium, authors presented concept papers and discussed knowledge-gaps for a research agenda and implications for advancing the IKT field. We took detailed field notes, audio-recorded the meeting and analysed the data using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-four participants attended the meeting, including researchers (n = 11), trainees (n = 6) and knowledge users (n = 7). Seven overarching categories emerged from these proceedings - IKT theory, IKT methods, IKT process, promoting partnership, definitions and distinctions of key IKT terms, capacity-building, and role of funders. Within these categories, priorities identified for future IKT research included: (1) improving clarity about research co-production/IKT theories and frameworks; (2) describing the process for engaging knowledge users; and (3) identifying research co-production/IKT outcomes and methods for evaluation. CONCLUSION: The Integrated Knowledge Translation State of the Science Colloquium initiated a research agenda to advance IKT science and practice. Next steps will focus on building a theoretical and evidence base for IKT.

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)0.396
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.475
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3960.475
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0230.020
Science and technology studies0.0120.023
Scholarly communication0.0370.049
Open science0.0120.033
Research integrity0.0170.028
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.947
GPT teacher head0.765
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreCommentary

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

Citations107
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Research Policy and SystemsSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207