Preparing an integrated self‐management support intervention for people living with schizophrenia: Creating collaborative spaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This article describes the planning and development of a novel self-management support protocol, self-management engaging together (SET) for Health, purposefully designed and embedded within traditional case management services to be accessible to people living with schizophrenia and comorbidities. Drawing on established self-management principles, SET for Health was codesigned by researchers, healthcare providers and clients, to create a practical and meaningful intervention to support the target group to manage their own health and wellness. Decision making is described behind tailoring the self-management innovation to meet the needs of an at risk, disadvantaged group served by tertiary, public health care in Canada. METHOD: This integrated knowledge translation (IKT) study used a descriptive approach to document the process of planning and operationalizing the SET for Health intervention as a part of routine care in two community-based teams providing predominantly schizophrenia services. Diffusion of innovations literature informed planning. The setting was strategically prepared for organizational change. A situational assessment and theoretical frameworks identified contextual elements to be addressed. Existing established self-management approaches for mental illness were appraised. RESULTS: When a review of established approaches revealed incongruence with the aims and context of service delivery, common essential elements were distilled. To facilitate collaborative client-provider self-management conversations and self-management learning opportunities, core components were operationalized by the use of tailored interactive tools. The materials coproduced by clients and providers offered joint reference tools, foundational for capacity-building and recognition of progress. CONCLUSION: Planning and developing a model of self-management support for integration into traditional schizophrenia case management services required attention to the complex social ecological nature of the treatment approach and the workplace context. Demonstration of proof of concept is described in a separate paper.
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 | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".