The development of a national evaluation framework for the First Link<sup>®</sup> program across Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In Canada, the Alzheimer Society’s First Link® program connects people living with dementia and their caregivers to the information, supports and services they need as early as possible and throughout the progression of the disease. Since its launch in 2002, First Link® has been implemented in all provincial societies across Canada. We have developed a national evaluation framework to guide the Alzheimer Society to gather data to assess First Link’s® impact on the health system. This work has been conducted with active engagement and consultation with the Alzheimer Society, persons living with dementia and their caregivers and other health system stakeholders. We have also received guidance from a national project advisory committee of stakeholders. A contribution analysis lens was used to understand how the First Link® program may contribute to health system outcomes. First, we assessed the current state of the First Link® program across Canada and developed a theory of change. Key informant interviews with First Link® staff, clients and community referral partners, as well as those without direct experience with the First Link® program, were used to gather evidence to build upon and test the theory of change. We then mapped all available and potential data sources to the theory of change to develop a draft evaluation framework with indicators that show program impact. The draft evaluation framework will be presented to stakeholders for feedback and tested and revised in a rapid cycle evaluation at a representative group of Alzheimer Society pilot sites. The outcomes of this initiative will provide data to support the Alzheimer Societies’ efforts to build a national case for ongoing, sustainable funding for First Link®.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.397 | 0.224 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".