Is this really equity? Engaging experts-by-experience in Learning Health Systems to generate meaningful change solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background:Learning Health Systems (LHS) require rigorous integration of evidence, experience, expertise, and values as a formula to produce equitable and meaningful change solutions for population health and wellbeing. The Participatory Research to Action (PR2A) Framework can guide authentic engagement of experts-by-experience across the LHS learning cycle. Audience:To produce equity-driven solutions in a learning health system, a rigorous approach to authentic and meaningful engagement that values diverse experiences and expertise is needed. PR2A offers concrete steps engaging diverse groups of experts-by-experience to generate equitable solutions to complex health care issues. We invite anyone interested in authentic collaboration to produce meaningful, relevant, and transformative change through equity-driven solutions to attend our workshop. Approach: In this interactive workshop, attendees will learn about SE Research Centre PR2A Framework and its application for meaningful engagement of experts-by-experience to support equity-driven learning cycles and solutions (5 minutes). We will explore the framework iterative six-stage process and discuss how it has been used to integrate evidence, experience, expertise, and values as a formula for transformative change across a series of interconnected projects at a Canadian LHS (0 minutes). A brief overview of the projects will be given: ) identifying priority research questions on aging and mental health according to Canadians; 2) formalizing an expert-by-experience group dedicated to mobilizing knowledge of the priority questions; and 3) co-designing evidence-based solutions to two priority questions through participatory research. Challenges with equitably engaging diverse partners in these projects (e.g., increasing group diversity along linguistic and other dimensions; reliance on the research team to facilitate expert-by-experience groups) will be highlighted. For most of the workshop (35 minutes) attendees will be divided into small groups and work together to apply the PR2A framework using one of the priority unanswered questions on aging and mental health as a hypothetical research/innovation scenario. Attendees will be guided through the PR2A Framework first stage, discussing who needs to be involved in the LHS learning cycle, why, and to what end. Participants will be encouraged to think critically about how challenges to engaging experts-by-experience can be addressed in the research/innovation project design and implementation to improve inclusion, equity, and accessibility. Following the small group brainstorming, attendees will have an opportunity to share with the whole group their experiences and perceptions of PR2A applicability and usefulness to their work (0 minutes).This workshop will apply multiple methods of engagement to create an interactive environment and accommodate diverse learning preferences. Engagement approaches will include didactic presentation, small and large group facilitated discussion, and hands-on brainstorming with worksheets and creative materials (e.g., pen, paper, cut-outs). Outcomes:Following the small group discussion, one attendee from each group will share back with everyone their group proposed project, the priority question it addresses, and how PR2A informed equitable practices in the project planning/design. Attendees will also be given the chance to share their reflections and key take-aways with the large group, including knowledge they will apply to future projects and new ways of thinking about equity within LHS. Attendees will be able to take their worksheets and notes home with them, in addition to handouts about the PR2A Framework.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".