Additional file 1 of Efficacy of sustained knowledge translation (KT) interventions in chronic disease management in older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of complex interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Additional file 1: Appendix 1. Systematic Review Methods. Appendix 2. Protocol Deviations Summary Sheet. Appendix 3. Delphi Results. Appendix 4. KT sustainability outcome definitions. Appendix 5. Search Strategy for MEDLINE. Appendix 6. Coding Guide for KT Intervention Components Using EPOC Taxonomy Coding. Appendix 7. Coding Guides for Clinical Intervention Components using BCT coding. Appendix 8. List of Included Studies. Appendix 9. Individual Study Characteristics. Appendix 10. Individual Patient Characteristics. Appendix 11. Sustainability of KT Interventions Summarized Results. Appendix 12. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Risk of Bias Results. Appendix 13. Contour-Enhanced Funnel Plots. Appendix 14. Additional Analysis Results. Appendix 15. Individual Study Results. Appendix 16. Meta-analysis Results of All Interventions vs Usual Care. Appendix 17. Subgroup Analyses of All KT Interventions vs Usual Care. Appendix 18. Sensitivity Analyses of All KT Interventions vs Usual Care. Appendix 19. Meta-regression for Each Outcome/Scale Comparing Any KT Intervention vs Usual Care.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.791 | 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".