THEORY TO PRACTICE IN THE PHYSICAL DISABILITY COMMUNITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this dissertation was to test the utility of theories across the development, implementation, and evaluation of three nationwide knowledge translation (KT) interventions in the physical disability community. Using a theory-based evaluation guided by the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), Study 1 evaluates the effectiveness of an evidence-based, continuing education module designed to increase emergency health care professionals’ (HCPs) knowledge and use of clinical practice guidelines for managing patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) who present with autonomic dysrefexia. Findings suggest that behaviour change theory should be integrated into the intervention to change theory-based determinants of behaviour, and that information about intervention implementation may help explain observed outcomes. Study 2 examined the use of theory across three phases of research in the Canadian Paralympic Committee’s Changing Minds, Changing Lives (CMCL) intervention. Study 2.1 describes the restructuring of the CMCL curriculum to include research evidence and theory. Study 2.2 evaluates the short- and long-term effects of the CMCL intervention on HCPs’ social cognitions for discussing leisure-time physical activity (LTPA), and explores key implementation variables that predict changes in HCPs’ social cognitions. Overall Study 2 results suggest that: (1) using a KT framework and integrating stakeholders throughout intervention development increases the likelihood that interventionists will adopt and implement the intervention, and (2) real-world implementation is important to understanding intervention effectiveness. Study 3 examines the effectiveness, and its implementation correlates, of Get in Motion (GIM), a nationwide, LTPA-enhancing telephone counseling service for adults with SCI. Study 3 furthers our understanding of the relationship between implementation and effectiveness, and suggests key implementation ingredients that could be targeted in future refinements of GIM. Together, the dissertation studies contribute to our understanding of how to use theory when developing, implementing, and evaluating behaviour change interventions targeting HCPs and other end-users in the physical disability community.
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 | 0.053 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".