Learning from reflective journaling; the experience of navigators in assisting patients access to health and social resources in the community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We developed and implemented a person-centered navigation model integrated in primary care where patients were referred to the Access to Resources in the Community (ARC) study by their primary care provider (PCP). The purpose of this paper is to explore the lay navigators’ learning experience as reflected in their journals and present implications for education and health promotion practice. Sixty-six journal entries from two navigators were analysed. To code the data, we used a newly developed framework based upon the theory-informed lay navigator training programme. Five unique themes were identified: 1) Gaining and Building Trust, 2) Developing Empathy, 3) Experiencing Hope and Optimism, 4) Feeling Helplessness and 5) Celebrating Gains and Successes. The five themes identified paint a sequential picture of the journey of leading individuals from primary care to health and social community resources. This innovative approach has expanded our understanding of how navigators learn in practice, more specifically how they learn from patients and how they develop knowledge and skills in person-centered care. Incorporating reflective journaling as a regular practice provides situational awareness and leads to enhanced learning. Practising person-centered care also develops when a trusting and empathetic relationship is established.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".