Participatory research in Canada (2013-2018): a cross-sectional survey of academic researchers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Participatory research encompasses diverse investigative approaches that engage community, industry, and other nonacademic collaborators. While investigators have examined single studies to explore research processes and impacts, less is known about the participatory research ecosystem. To address this, our team conducted an online survey to characterize academic researchers who conducted participatory research in Canada (2013–8). Of 1135 respondents (response rate = 27.5 per cent), 38.9 per cent identified their research project as participatory. Results of a multivariable logistic regression showed that academic researchers identifying as women or gender diverse, Indigenous or racialized, of older age, funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, and those with larger grants were more likely to conduct participatory research. This study contributes to a growing understanding of individual- and institution-level factors that may influence academic researcher engagement with research coproduction. These findings offer new insights to inform science policy, funding priorities, and sustainable participatory research environments in academia.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Metaresearch Domain: Methods · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: yes · About a Canadian topic: yes | Observational | low |
| gpt | Metaresearch Domain: Methods · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: yes · About a Canadian topic: yes | Observational | high |
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 | 0.025 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it