MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007769584 · doi:10.1258/1357633054461732

An online survey of nurses’ perceptions, knowledge and expectations of the National Health Service modernization programme

2005· article· en· W2007769584 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. Bryson, Natalie Tidy, Michael Smith, Shařon Levy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Telemedicine and Telecare · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)NursingModernization theoryService (business)PerceptionMedicineComputer-assisted web interviewingHealth careMedical educationFamily medicinePsychologyBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conducted an online survey to investigate nurses' perceptions, knowledge and expectations of the National Health Service (NHS) modernization programme in the UK. The questionnaire was available for 28 days via the Website of the Royal College of Nursing. The questionnaire was completed by 2020 nurses, midwives and health visitors working in all sectors of the health service in a wide range of specialties and environments of care. Less than one-quarter of respondents felt that they had adequate information about NHS information technology (IT) developments. In all, 528 (26%) said this was the first they had heard of the initiatives. Only 383 respondents (19%) felt adequately informed about the development of electronic health records; 470 (23%) felt inadequately informed and 456 (23%) had only heard something about it. The findings of this survey suggest that nursing staff are not widely aware of current IT plans and programmes in the NHS. They suggest that nurses also lack confidence in using advanced IT, which is compounded by lack of training.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.349 · 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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Telemedicine and TelecareSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207