MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995178791 · doi:10.1080/00981389.2014.936991

Can Information and Communication Technologies Support Patient Engagement? A Review of Opportunities and Challenges in Health Social Work

2014· review· en· W1995178791 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

VenueSocial Work in Health Care · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersStony Brook University
KeywordsInformation and Communications TechnologySocial workWork (physics)Health carePublic relationsInformaticsKnowledge managementHealth informaticsSociologyMedicineNursingPolitical sciencePublic healthComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite becoming a prerequisite for participation in an information-based society, the use of information communication technologies (ICT) within social work and health care remains in its infancy. Currently, there is a push to adopt newer technologies to enhance practice. This article aims to highlight some of the innovative ways in which ICT have been adopted and adapted to augment social work practice. The need for social workers to become proficient in the use of newer technologies, opportunities for implementing ICT within a health care setting, and potential challenges at the professional, ethical, and systemic level are explored. Using the available literature as a guide, recommendations and strategies to strengthen implementation of ICTs into health social work are provided.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.202 · 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