An exploration of technology, healthcare, preventative education in coastalNewfoundland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2002, video conferencing was introduced into five communities on the southwest coast of Newfoundland to augment health care and preventative education. Through focus groups and individual interviews with female health practitioners and community members, this study explored their concerns and visions for the future around this technology. Findings show that technical problems, issues of confidentiality, fear of further health care erosion, and lack of training are major hindrances. There is also a definite clash between technical training and distance on the one hand, and a hands-on, caring pedagogy on the other. However, video conferencing is slowly coming to be used for some diagnostic purposes, and health education and research are augmented by Internet access. If technical problems are resolved and the needs and experiences of nurse practitioners are used to guide the application of information and communication technology (ICT), then ICT will become a tool, servant, and additional support for health care and preventative education. Résumé En 2002, la vidéo-conférence a été introduite dans cinq communautés le long de la côte sud-ouest de Terre-Neuve afin d’améliorer les systèmes de santé et d’éducation préventif, À l’aide de groupes de discussion et d’entrevues personnalisées au sein du personnel féminin de santé et des members de la communauté, cette étude s’est penchée sur leurs inquietudes et visions au sujet des possibilités futures de cette technologie. Les résultats obtenus démontrent que les problèmes techniques, la confidentialité de l’information, la peur de la poursuite de l’érosion des soins de santé et la formation insuffisante représentent des freins considérables. Il existe aussi un conflit prononcé entre, d’une part, la formation technique à distance et d’autre part, une pédagogie de proximité. Cependant, la vidéo-conférence commence graduellement à être utilisée pour faire des diagnostiques, bien que la formation et les connaissances au sujet de la santé ont augmenté dû à l’accès répendu à internet. À moins que les problèmes et que les conflits sur la qualité de la formation soient adressés, cette forme de ‘télé-santé’ restera inefficace.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".