MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010561441 · doi:10.1089/tmj.2005.11.137

The Essence of Telehealth Readiness in Rural Communities: An Organizational Perspective

2005· article· en· W2010561441 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTelemedicine Journal and e-Health · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaUniversity of Calgary
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsTelehealthPerspective (graphical)Knowledge managementPublic relationsQualitative researchPsychologyBusinessNursingHealth careTelemedicineSociologyMedicinePolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines telehealth readiness from an organizational perspective and explores the essence of telehealth readiness among four domains, namely, patients, practitioners, the public, and organizations in rural Canadian communities. Because readiness is a necessary requirement for the successful implementation of an innovation, it is important to identify and ensure core factors of readiness before costly investments are made. The findings presented here derive from a qualitative phenomenological research approach involving semistructured telephone interviews with four key informants (respondents). The data identified four categories of readiness in an organizational setting: core readiness, engagement, structural readiness, and nonreadiness. Understanding organizational readiness within rural and remote communities is an important step for the successful implementation of telehealth services into existing systems of health care.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.381
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