MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987479932 · doi:10.1089/tmj.2010.0175

Supporting Health Professionals Through Information and Communication Technologies: A Systematic Review of the Effects of Information and Communication Technologies on Recruitment and Retention

2011· review· en· W1987479932 on OpenAlexaff
Marie‐Pierre Gagnon, Hugo Pollender, Amélie Trépanier, Emmanuel Duplàa, Birama Apho Ly

Bibliographic record

VenueTelemedicine Journal and e-Health · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployer Branding and e-HRM
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité LavalHôpital Saint-François d'AssiseCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth professionalsICTSPsychological interventionEconomic shortageInformation and Communications TechnologyHealth careSystematic reviewBusinessPublic relationsKnowledge managementPsychologyMedical educationNursingMedicineMEDLINEPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: Healthcare personnel shortage is a growing concern in many countries, especially in remote areas, where it has major consequences on the accessibility of health services. Information and communication technologies (ICTs) have often been proposed as having positive effects on certain dimensions of the recruitment and retention of professionals working in the healthcare sector. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the impact of interventions using ICTs on recruitment and retention of healthcare professionals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted, including the following steps: exploring scientific and gray literature through established criteria and data extraction of relevant information by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Of the 2,225 screened studies, 13 were included. Nine studies showed a positive, often indirect, influence that ICTs may have on recruitment and retention. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the conclusions of 9 of 13 studies reporting a possible positive influence of ICTs on the recruitment and retention of healthcare professionals, these results highlight the need of a deeper reflection on that topic. Therefore, more research is needed.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTelemedicine Journal and e-HealthSame topicEmployer Branding and e-HRMFrench-language works237,207