MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991942520 · doi:10.1258/135763303322596183

Organizational readiness for telemedicine: Implications for success and failure

2003· article· en· W1991942520 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Telemedicine and Telecare · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicTeam Dynamics and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelemedicineTelehealthAllianceKnowledge managementHealth careKey (lock)BusinessProcess managementNursingComputer scienceMedicineComputer securityPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of telemedicine brings about change in health-care organizations and opens up new possibilities for service delivery. The organizational environment is often crucial in determining whether or not telemedicine applications will be successful. To examine the concept of 'organizational readiness for telemedicine' as a factor to explain why telemedicine initiatives succeed or fail, the results were used of interviews with key informants, conducted in two studies: the Alliance for Building Capacity project and the National Initiative for Telehealth guidelines project. The data indicate that organizational readiness for telemedicine is a multifaceted concept that is related to planning and the workplace environment. A greater understanding of the factors within organizational readiness could help to avoid costly implementation errors. 'Readiness' needs to be systematically assessed and is important for long-term success.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.301 · 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