Engaging Women With Lived Experience: A Novel Cross-Canada Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Women with heart disease, stroke, and vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) experience gender inequities across the health care continuum. The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada conducted needs assessment to inform its approach in addressing health inequities experienced by women with heart disease, stroke, and VCI across the continuum of care. Although specific input is confidential, this article outlines the engagement methods used and the evaluation results. The 3-stage engagement process consisted of an internal content review, 18 in-person discussion groups via a cross-Canada tour, 14 expert interviews, and a collaboration session. In total, 204 and 57 participants were recruited for the cross-Canada tour and collaboration session, respectively. Using the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool, participants scored the engagement processes positively and found participation to be a valuable use of their time. This undertaking highlighted aspects to consider when engaging people with lived experience and how engagement can support the recovery journey. Insights presented throughout this article can help inform future research that seeks to engage stakeholders at a national level.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".