Rehabilitació i reforma de la masia "Can Trias" a Sant Matí de Llémena
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Only one telehealth readiness assessment tool, that of Jennett et al., covers all types of telehealth projects, regardless of health-care provision context. However, this instrument is only available in English and has not undergone psychometric evaluation. We developed a French-Canadian version of the Practitioner Telehealth Readiness Assessment Tool and the Organizational Telehealth Readiness Assessment Tool. Transcultural validity was assessed by nine practitioners and 12 clinical project co-ordinators or administrators. For practitioners and managers, there was no significant difference between the scores of the English and the French versions of the questionnaires. The results showed that the telehealth readiness of co-ordinators or administrators was greater than that of practitioners when the range in scores was taken into account. The French-Canadian versions of the two questionnaires make it possible to assess telehealth readiness among French speakers. However, other studies involving patients will be necessary to validate the Patient-Public Telehealth Readiness Assessment Tool.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".