MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405098444 · doi:10.1101/2024.12.03.24318454

From community as data providers to community as data users: developing a community-led research platform using program data in HIV/STI Program Science in Kenya

2024· preprint· en· W4405098444 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy Tahmo, Anthony Noah, Byron Odhiambo, Charles Kyalo, Elly Ondiek, Fortune Ligare, Gilbert Asuri, Jedidah Wanjiku, John Alex Njenga, John N. Maina, Kennedy Mwendwa, Kennedy Olango, Kennedy Ouma, Loice Nekesa, Pascal Macharia, Silvano Tabbu, Kristy C.Y. Yiu, Robert Lorway, Parinita Bhattacharjee, Huiting Ma, Lisa Lazarus, Sharmistha Mishra, Jeffrey Walimbwa

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaToronto Public HealthUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipCommunity engagementPublic relationsCapacity buildingLeverage (statistics)Political scienceMedical educationMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Community-based organizations (CBOs) are critical in providing trusted and targeted HIV/STI services to gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM). Despite significant strides in CBOs’ involvement in HIV/STI research, there remain gaps in meaningful engagement, especially in quantitative research. This paper explores the development of HEKA, a community-led research platform where community-based organizations build capacity and leverage routinely collected program data to design research that aims to improve HIV/STI programs. We share a collective reflection on the lessons learned in the process, the challenges that emerged, and recommendations for facilitating community-based program science. Methodology Through a collaborative process, seven CBOs serving GBMSM in Kenya created the HEKA Research Initiative and designed a framework of collaboration, through which we assessed the technical gaps in quantitative research among staff, applied for funding, co-designed capacity-building workshops with academic partners, and developed a research agenda. We established a monthly meeting frequency and through collective reflection, documented the lessons and challenges in the process. Outcomes With our successful grant, we organized an in-person workshop on quantitative research methods and R programming. The team identified research questions and completed data cleaning/harmonization of program data. HEKA was successful because we emphasized a co-leadership framework (research direction evolved through shared/delegated leadership), and peer-to-peer mentorship. Major challenges included: obtaining sustained funding for engagement; ensuring the learning pace allows all individuals to be on the same page; confronting the socio-political climate; long commutes between counties for in-person meetings; and the limitation in using Excel files as primary tools for data capture. Conclusions HEKA demonstrates the potential for community-based and led research in the HIV/STI field. The model we present can serve as a blueprint for other community-based organizations aiming to lead collaborative or independent research and build capacity.

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)0.161
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.098
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1610.098
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.010
Scholarly communication0.0130.014
Open science0.0050.034
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.513
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.041 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→