MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308154527 · doi:10.1016/j.jth.2022.101478

Applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to examine barriers and facilitators to built environment change in five Canadian municipalities: Lessons from road safety and injury prevention professionals

2022· article· en· W4308154527 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Emily McCullogh, Audrey R. Giles, Alison Macpherson, Brent Hagel, Claire Buchan, Ian Pike, Juan Torres, Pamela Fuselli, Tona M. Pitt, Pegah Tavakolfar, Élie Desrochers, Sarah A. Richmond

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transport & Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryParachuteUniversité de MontréalUniversity of TorontoBC Children's HospitalYork UniversityPublic Health OntarioUniversity of British ColumbiaHEC MontréalAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Pittsburgh
KeywordsImplementation researchBusinessProcess managementTransport engineeringMedicineEngineeringPsychological interventionNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Road traffic injury and death continue to be a concern in Canada. The built environment (BE) is a contributing factor affecting the health of road users, yet there are significant challenges to making injury-reducing BE changes. This research increases our knowledge of these challenges by investigating the opinions of injury prevention and road safety professionals working in Canada about the barriers and facilitators to BE change. Methods Semi-structured interviews and virtual focus groups (VFG) were conducted with 80 key informants (KIs) working in transport and injury prevention sectors in five Canadian cities: Vancouver, Calgary, Peel Region, Toronto, and Montréal. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) informed the interview guides. Thematic analysis was used to systematically analyze the data, a process that involved developing codes aligning with the research question, what are the barriers and facilitators to BE change? Themes were cross-referenced with the CFIR domains and constructs to illustrate how barriers and facilitators influence implementation of BE changes. Results The prioritization of motor vehicles, lack of funding and resources, lack of political will, and sectoral silos were described as the most significant barriers to BE change. Cross-sectoral collaboration, data sharing, and champions and advocates were the most significant facilitators. Conclusions Cross-referencing themes with the CFIR situated our findings within the scope of implementation science, which demonstrated how barriers and facilitators influence BE change project implementation. The prioritization of motor vehicles results in disproportionate injury and health risks for VRUs. Collaboration across sectors, with the support of champions and advocates, can facilitate sharing of resources, data, and expertise, which results in more opportunities to enact BE change. Knowledge of these barriers and facilitators, contextualized by the CFIR, makes a case for policy/decision-makers in Canada to approve BE projects that reduce risk of road traffic injury and death.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.204
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transport & HealthSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207