e-Health? Clinical information network interest and impediments in a community paediatric setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increased interest in implementing evidence-based medicine in paediatric practice has led to the development of a variety of electronic clinical and decision-making support tools. Electronic medical records and information resources have the potential to improve both the clinical and cost effectiveness of paediatric community practice at the point of care. Barriers to the successful implementation of clinical information Intranet resources include physician attitudes, as well as system and practitioner capabilities. OBJECTIVE: To examine Ontario's community care paediatricians' electronic information resource needs and interest in accessing the proposed Central West Ontario Pediatric Information Network (CWPIN). DESIGN: Cross-sectional, interviewer-facilitated, structured survey. POPULATION STUDIED: Paediatricians providing community care in the Central West Ontario Health Region. MAIN RESULTS: Three-quarters of regional community paediatricians responded to the survey. Of those surveyed, 98% expressed interest in gaining access to the CWPIN. Computer literacy, suggested by home computer and Internet use rates (88% and 81%, respectively), did not differ significantly by age or sex. Other factors that may affect network use, such as workplace computer use and allied personnel role assignment, differed by sex, indicating potentially greater CWPIN use among male practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians reported an overwhelming interest in gaining access to and using the CWPIN. Disparities in current workplace but not home-based computer use by sex indicate that workplace role allocation, rather than computer literacy, may explain sex differences in CWPIN use rates. Attitudinal and computer proficiency issues did not appear to be obstacles to implementing the clinical information Intranet resource in the region.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".