MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1593394624 · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1638839

eHealth in North America

2013· article· en· W1593394624 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueYearbook of Medical Informatics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaOntario Medical Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordseHealthHealth recordsGovernment (linguistics)Electronic health recordIncentiveBusinessIncentive programInvestment (military)Grey literatureEconomic growthPolitical scienceMEDLINEHealth careEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The overall objective of this paper is to provide an overview of the current status of electronic health record (EHR) adoption and implementation in Canada and the United States. METHODS: A review and synthesis of the empirical and grey literature about adoption of electronic health records in Canada and the United States was undertaken. RESULTS: Both Canada and the United States have experienced increases in their adoption rates. More specifically, 2012 adoption statistics reveal that the electronic medical record adoption rate in the United States is 69% and in Canada it is 57%. Significant investment by both governments has increased adoption of electronic records across North America. CONCLUSIONS: In the United States and Canada there has been a significant rise in the adoption of electronic records by health professionals with the aid of national government incentive programs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.374 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it