MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2045492644 · doi:10.1097/ncn.0b013e31819f7c07

Factors Influencing Outcomes of Clinical Information Systems Implementation

2009· review· en· W2045492644 on OpenAlexaff
DIANNE GRUBER, Greta G. Cummings, Lisa LeBlanc, Donna Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueCIN Computers Informatics Nursing · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImplementationInformation systemContext (archaeology)Process managementComputer scienceData extractionQuality (philosophy)Risk analysis (engineering)Knowledge managementOperations managementMedicineMEDLINEBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.205
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.205
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0080.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.264
GPT teacher head0.582
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations56
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCIN Computers Informatics Nursing→Same topicElectronic Health Records Systems→French-language works237,207→