MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409309716 · doi:10.31219/osf.io/m92fb_v1

Solutions for Kids in Pain: A Knowledge Mobilization Network Built on a Foundation of Patient Partnership

2024· preprint· en· W4409309716 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Dawn P. Richards, Christine T. Chambers, Isabel Jordán, Kimberly Strain, Raad Fadaak, Louise Tunnah, Emily Gruenwoldt, Kathryn A. Birnie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMobilizationGeneral partnershipFoundation (evidence)BusinessPublic relationsMedicineKnowledge managementPolitical scienceComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Patient engagement is an approach that is expected or required to be part of a project, initiative or network by many research funding organizations. Solutions for Kids in Pain (SKIP) is a national knowledge mobilization network in Canada that was competitively funded and built on a foundation of engaging with patients (children and youth) and caregivers (parents) in its mission and vision. At the core of SKIP’s foundation was the PatientsIncludedTM charter, on which it grew and evolved its patient engagement efforts.Main Body: SKIP’s mission is to mobilize evidence-based solutions for children’s pain management. Unique to its funding requirements, SKIP was co-led by an academic institution (Dalhousie University) and a knowledge user partner (Children’s Healthcare Canada). SKIP is hosted at the university, where its central administration team is located, with six knowledge mobilization hubs based in cities across Canada. Patient engagement has been crucial to SKIP’s work with patient partners included in SKIP’s governance, management, committees, and knowledge mobilization activities. This paper shares and provides context for SKIP’s approach to patient partnership. How SKIP tailored its approach depending on the specific project context is demonstrated with three case studies. These case studies include SKIP’s Patient and Caregiver Advisory Committee which also developed resources that others may wish to use, the Youth in Pain Project which led to open calls for partnerships and unique approaches to listening and undertaking patient-informed projects, and Canada’s first national health standard for Pediatric Pain Management, which was co-developed with patient partners. Each unique case study demonstrates foundational principles to SKIP’s patient partnership such as offering compensation, creating a safe space, and others.Conclusion: Over its lifespan, SKIP committed to and wove patient partnership throughout all aspects of its network. We share the evolution of and insights gained from SKIP’s patient partnership activities, including resources for others to take and make their own. We encourage other research and knowledge mobilization networks to learn from this important patient partnership work and adopt and adapt what we share to their own contexts.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0220.009
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0030.028
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.354
GPT teacher head0.540
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreOther

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealth Sciences Research and Education→French-language works237,207→