MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2000987654 · doi:10.1016/s0840-4704(10)60357-2

Implementing Telehomecare: Process and Issues from Managers' Perspectives

2005· article· en· W2000987654 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lynda Atack, Diane Duff

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsCentennial College
FundersCanarie
KeywordsReimbursementBusinessHealth careProcess managementSustainabilityProcess (computing)Key (lock)Knowledge managementNursingMedicineComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An innovative telehomecare project was recently undertaken in East York, Toronto to deliver integrated, video-based remote care to patients with chronic illnesses. Research conducted with healthcare managers uncovered a number of key issues, including organizational readiness, recruitment, funding/reimbursement, clinical care, support and training and sustainability. The results of the study indicate that implementing telehomecare involves much more than adding equipment; it is about change management and care re-design.

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)0.063
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.076
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0630.076
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management Forum→Same topicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation→French-language works237,207→