MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402406137 · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v9i5.2666

Conceptualizing community data governance for race-related, population data: a scoping review and key informant interviews

2024· review· en· W4402406137 on OpenAlexaff
Elise Leong-Sit, Laura Legere, Sabella Yussuf-Homenauth, Astrid Guttmann, Baiju R. Shah, Michael J. Schull, Sujitha Ratnasingham, J. Michael Paterson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Population Data Science · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySunnybrook Health Science CentreSickKids Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)Key (lock)PopulationCorporate governancePsychologyBusinessComputer scienceSociologyDemographyComputer securityFinanceGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ObjectiveThere is growing recognition of the importance of community data governance to build accountability of research institutions to communities. Our organization, a steward of health and administrative population-level data, has previously implemented community governance structures for Indigenous data. This scoping initiative explores development and implementation of an additional community governance structure for race-related data. ApproachWe conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed and grey literature to identify existing practices of community data governance. We also conducted key informant interviews with thirteen racialized community stakeholders, who addressed open-ended questions on potential co-design processes as well as governance mandates, scopes, barriers, and facilitators. ResultsThe scoping review identified eight community data governance examples. Two of these pertained to race-related data, while the remaining six pertained to other data that identified “community” geographically, by disease condition, life stage, and/or economic circumstance. Governance structures were diverse, ranging from one-time crowd-design of a data-sharing agreement to quarterly meetings of a governing board to review project-level data requests. Key informant interviews provided four themes to guide implementation in the context of our organization: exploring organizational readiness, considering who should be involved, defining the scope and mandate, and drafting an approach and process. ConclusionWe are committed to implementing a community governance structure for race-related, population-level data. However, there are limited examples of similar structures in the existing literature. ImplicationsThe identified examples and the advice of community stakeholders will guide co-design of a preliminary structure, scope, and mandate for community governance of race-related, population-level data.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.319
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.307
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.840

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3190.307
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0310.026
Science and technology studies0.0110.015
Scholarly communication0.0160.024
Open science0.0060.015
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.695
GPT teacher head0.621
Teacher spread0.074 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Population Data ScienceSame topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207