Knowledge‐system theory in society: Charting the growth of knowledge‐system models over a decade, 1994–2003
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The second half of the twentieth century saw the emergence of three knowledge‐system models: Mode 2 knowledge production, the Triple Helix, and Post‐Normal Science (PNS). Today, this emphasis on knowledge use is the focus of such important health movements as evidence‐based medicine. Building on the methodological work of Shinn (2002) and the theoretical work of Holzner and Marx (1979), we conducted a bibliometric study of the extent to which the three knowledge‐system models are used by researchers to frame problems of health‐knowledge use. By doing so, we reveal how these models fit into a larger knowledge system of health and evidence‐based decision making. The study results show clearly that although these knowledge models are extremely popular for contextualizing research, there is a distinct lack of emphasis on use of the models in knowledge utilization or evidence‐based medicine. We recommend using these models for further research in three specific dimensions of health systems analysis: (a) differences in language use, (b) transformative thinking about health‐knowledge functions, and (c) ethical analysis of institutional linkages.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it