MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082394963 · doi:10.1089/tmj.2006.0050

Hepatitis C Videoconferencing: The Impact on Continuing Medical Education for Rural Healthcare Providers

2007· article· en· W2082394963 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueTelemedicine Journal and e-Health · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicHealthcare Systems and Technology
Canadian institutionsCentre for Family Medicine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContinuing medical educationVideoconferencingIntervention (counseling)Continuing educationTelemedicineSignificant differenceFamily medicineHealth careInternal medicineNursingMedical educationMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study compared the impact of multipoint videoconferencing (VC) versus standard lecturing (ST) on primary care providers' (MDs, NPs/PAs, and RNs) education regarding hepatitis C virus (HCV). The hypothesis was that the educational impact of teaching through telemedicine is comparable to the traditional method. The aim was to provide participants clinically relevant information and knowledge about the natural history, diagnosis, and management of HCV. Improved knowledge was scored from a 10-item quiz administered before and after the educational intervention. Comparison of the pretest knowledge scores within provider groups showed no statistically significant difference in baseline knowledge for the ST versus VC method. However, for all practitioners combined, the VC group scored significantly lower on the pretest than the ST group (p < 0.05). All three types of learners improved their knowledge scores following intervention. On average, MDs and NP/PAs correctly answered two to 3.5 more questions in the posttest. RNs showed the greatest improvements, correctly answering an average of four to five more questions following intervention. Improvement in knowledge scores between the two methods was statistically significant in favor of VC for the MDs (VC = 3.56 +/- 1.92 vs. ST = 2.13 +/- 1.89, p < 0.001) and all groups combined (VC 4.37 +/- 1.92 vs ST 3.06 +/- 1.89, p < 0.001). The results of this study indicate that VC is equivalent, if not better, than standard continuing medical education (CME). VC can potentially improve clinician education regarding the history, diagnosis, and management of HCV, thereby making a substantial impact on the clinical course of patients with this condition. In addition, VC has the potential to eliminate the financial and geographic barriers to professional education for rural practitioners.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.873
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.321 · 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