Gathering Voices from Patients, Families, and Communities: A University and Health System Partnership
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: This novel university and health system initiative was designed to meet two needs: ) the Saskatchewan Health Authority (SHA) challenge to gather healthcare experience data from underserved communities, and 2) the university studentsdesire to engage in meaningful volunteer activities. Approach: In Saskatchewan, Canada during the university term 2023-24, a pilot co-curricular engaged learning project was launched to train students in patient-oriented healthcare research. This engaged learning project was a partnership between the SHA and St. Thomas More College, a University of Saskatchewan (USask) federated college. During the 4-week project, students learned key concepts in conducting health research including research ethics, privacy and confidentiality of health information, patient-oriented research, research relationships with Indigenous communities, sex and gender based analysis, and equity in healthcare. The project was facilitated by a USask faculty member and three Patient Partners, who were members of the SHA PCM team. The Saskatchewan Centre for Patient-Oriented Research and St. Thomas More College were key supports in the pilot. In January 2024, the students gained hands-on experience collecting Patient-Reported Experience Measures (PREMs). They were assigned to one of the two research initiatives, telephone interviews for healthcare survey participants or in-person focus groups for moms with babies under 2 months. Results: When the project was advertised via the primary USask communication channel, 50 students applied, 30 were accepted, and 28 completed the full 4-week program. Any upper-year student was eligible if they could commit to the project meeting schedule. The students came from various backgrounds and colleges at USask where majority of the students had never done qualitative research, and none had experience with patient-oriented research. The students were grouped in pods to complete data collection, analysis, and reporting, either through telephone interviews or focus groups. By April 2024, students conducted four focus groups with mothers regarding SHA services for new babies, and 35 telephone interviews with participants of a general healthcare experiences survey. Brief reports were prepared and distributed to healthcare system leaders to help inform decision making. As of June 2024, the engaged learning project is being evaluated. Focus groups and interviews are being conducted with participants from this project to understand how best to improve the learning experience and the resulting research output for the health system. Implications: The potential for collaboration between post secondary academic programs and the health system is relatively untapped in contexts other than clinical learning experiences and could lead to initiatives that generate better outcomes and experiences for patients and communities. The project provided students with a unique experience to develop crucial skills in patient-oriented research, to learn from Patient Partners, and to collect PREMS that contribute to SHA quality improvement initiatives. An evaluation is underway to assess the program effectiveness for both the SHA and the students. This project can have long lasting impacts on the students as they developed transferable skills and practices that will help them in their healthcare careers. This engaged learning project is a step in training the next generation of health care providers to value and understand patient-oriented research and care. The voices of patients, families, and communities are necessary to inform policies and improve healthcare in Saskatchewan for everyone.
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 | 0.040 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.041 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".