MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084056308 · doi:10.1111/hex.13123

INNOVATE Research: Impact of a workshop to develop researcher capacity to engage youth in research

2020· article· en· W3084056308 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Expectations · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteDouglas CollegeDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionYouth engagementCapacity buildingPositive Youth DevelopmentMedical educationPsychologyWork (physics)Public relationsMedicinePolitical scienceEngineeringDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Engaging youth in research provides substantial benefits to research about youth-related needs, concerns and interventions. However, researchers require training and capacity development to work in this manner. METHODS: A capacity-building intervention, INNOVATE Research, was co-designed with youth and adult researchers and delivered to researchers in three major academic research institutions across Canada. Fifty-seven attendees participated in this research project evaluating youth engagement practices, attitudes, perceived barriers, and perceived capacity development needs before attending the intervention and six months later. RESULTS: The intervention attracted researchers across various career levels, roles and disciplines. Participants were highly satisfied with the workshop activities. Follow-up assessments revealed significant increases in self-efficacy six months after the workshop (P = .035). Among possible barriers to youth engagement, four barriers significantly declined at follow-up. The barriers that decreased were largely related to practical knowledge about how to engage youth in research. Significantly more participants had integrated youth engagement into their teaching activities six months after the workshop compared to those who were doing so before the workshop (P = .007). A large proportion (71.9%) of participants expressed the need for a strengthened network of youth-engaged researchers; other future capacity-building approaches were also endorsed. CONCLUSIONS: The INNOVATE Research project provided improvements in youth engagement attitudes and practices among researchers, while lifting barriers. Future capacity-building work should continue to enhance the capacity of researchers to engage youth in research. Researchers notably pointed to the need to establish a network of youth-engaged researchers to provide ongoing, sustainable gains in youth engagement.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.169
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.169
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.028
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.980
GPT teacher head0.796
Teacher spread0.185 · 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