MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998298178 · doi:10.1089/tmj.2010.0057

The Impact of Telemedicine on Greenhouse Gas Emissions at an Academic Health Science Center in Canada

2010· article· en· W1998298178 on OpenAlexaffabout
Caterina Masino, Ed Rubinstein, Leon Lem, Brendan Purdy, Peter G. Rossos

Bibliographic record

VenueTelemedicine Journal and e-Health · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasTonneEnvironmental scienceCalculatorCarbon dioxideEnergy consumptionMetric (unit)Greenhouse effectEnvironmental engineeringGlobal warmingEngineeringWaste managementClimate changeOperations managementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study estimates the reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from 840 telemedicine consultations completed in a 6-month time period. Our model considers GHG emissions for both vehicle and videoconferencing unit energy use. Cost avoidance factors are also discussed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Travel distances in kilometers were calculated for each appointment using postal code data and Google Maps™ Web-based map calculator tools. RESULTS: Including return travel, an estimated 757,234 km were avoided, resulting in a GHG emissions savings of 185,159 kg (185 metric tons) of carbon dioxide equivalents in vehicle emissions. Approximately 360,444 g of other air pollutant emissions was also avoided. The GHG emissions produced by energy consumption for videoconference units were estimated to be 42 kg of carbon dioxide equivalents emitted for this sample. CONCLUSIONS: The overall GHG emissions associated with videoconferencing unit energy is minor when compared with those avoided from vehicle use. In addition to improved patient-centered care and cost savings, environmental benefits provide additional incentives for the adoption of telemedicine services.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations86
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTelemedicine Journal and e-HealthSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207