MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012305125 · doi:10.3917/pos.402.0125

Étude des déterminants individuels de l'adoption du dossier de santé électronique du Québec

2009· article· fr· W2012305125 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Haifa Mezni, Marie‐Pierre Gagnon, Julie Duplantie

Bibliographic record

VenuePratiques et Organisation des Soins · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsHôpital Saint-François d'Assise
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: The potential of electronic health records to improve effectiveness, safety and quality of health care has been shown in several previous studies. However healthcare professionals remain reticent as for its use, which limits its potential effect on the health care system. The present study aimed to evaluate physicians' perceptions towards the electronic health record of Quebec. METHODS: Based on a literature review of the factors affecting the adoption of information and communication technologies in general, and e-health in particular, questionnaire was developed. A total of 12 doctors who represent potential users of the Quebec electronic health record completed and returned the questionnaire. Afterwards we performed a thematic analysis of content which was followed by a theorisation of emerging concepts. RESULTS: Physicians' intention to adopt the Quebec electronic health record is positively influenced by perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, demonstrability of the results, system's compatibility with practice, and computer self-efficacy. Conversely, resistance to change negatively influences physicians' adoption of the electronic health record. CONCLUSION: It is crucial to understand factors that influence the acceptance of the Quebec electronic health records to inform decision makers. This will allow identifying potential users' expectations and to adjust implementation strategies accordingly in order to favour a better integration of this technology into medical practices.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePratiques et Organisation des SoinsSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207