MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Health Care Information Technology in Rural America: Electronic Medical Record Adoption Status in Meeting the National Agenda

2008· article· en· W2098064054 on OpenAlex
James A. Bahensky, Mirou Jaana, Marcia M. Ward

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

VenueThe Journal of Rural Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsBusinessGovernment (linguistics)Health careInvestment (military)Health information technologyRural areaRural healthEconomic growthPoliticsPublic relationsMarketingFinanceMedicinePolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuing is a national political drive for investments in health care information technology (HIT) that will allow the transformation of health care for quality improvement and cost reduction. Despite several initiatives by the federal government to spur this development, HIT implementation has been limited, particularly in the rural market. The status of technology use in the transformation effort is reviewed by examining electronic medical records (EMRs), analyzing the existing rural environment, identifying barriers and factors affecting their development and implementation, and recommending needed steps to make this transformation occur, particularly in rural communities. A review of the literature for HIT in rural settings indicates that very little progress has been made in the adoption and use of HIT in rural America. Financial barriers and a large number of HIT vendors offering different solutions present significant risks to rural health care providers wanting to invest in HIT. Although evidence in the literature has demonstrated benefits of adopting HIT such as EMRs, important technical, policy, organizational, and financial barriers still exist that prevent the implementation of these systems in rural settings. To expedite the spread of HIT in rural America, federal and state governments along with private payers, who are important beneficiaries of HIT, must make difficult decisions as to who pays for the investment in this technology, along with driving standards, simplifying approaches for reductions in risk, and creating a workable operational plan.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.374 · 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