Video Conferencing-based Telehealth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To review the experience with a province-wide telehealth system in Canada, and its implications for health care and health promotion. To explore whether group support systems (GSS) based on networked computers can substitute for video conferencing technology. METHODS: Key results of the evaluation of the BC Telehealth Program are summarized. The potential of extending the successful principles through use of GSS is explored based on literature review, demonstrations, and trial use for educational applications. RESULTS: The BC Telehealth Program was designed to support health professionals at secondary care facilities, such as regional and district hospitals in two application domains: children's and women's health (C&W) and emergency room and trauma care (ER-Trauma). Successful applications extended beyond health professionals and focused on chronic conditions, the management of which is contingent on visual information, and involves established teams in regular scheduled visits or in sessions scheduled well in advance. Ad hoc applications, in particular applications under emergency conditions proved problematic. Administrative applications in support of telehealth implementation, e.g., through facilitation of management and provider education, are essential for clinical success. Savings from support of administrative applications exceeded the substantial capital investment and made educational and clinical applications available at variable cost. Educational applications were shown to have significant clinical benefits. Exploration of GSS technology showed that it may not be mature enough to substitute for video conferencing technology in support of sophisticated training and education aiming at clinical impact. CONCLUSION: The substantial clinical and efficiency gains provided by video conferencing-based telehealth may for now continue to depend on mature video-conferencing technology.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".