MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334933345 · doi:10.1057/jit.2016.3

The Map and the Territory: An Ethnographic Study of the Low Utilisation of a Global eHealth Network

2016· article· en· W2334933345 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Duclos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Technology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoft systems methodologyeHealthContext (archaeology)Knowledge managementSociotechnical systemFlexibility (engineering)SociologyOperationalizationOpenness to experienceComputer sciencePublic relationsHealth carePolitical sciencePsychologyHealth informaticsEconomicsEconomic growthManagementSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent years were marked by the implementation of many eHealth projects using information and communication technologies to provide health services in developing countries. While generating great expectations, these projects remain poorly documented and available data suggest high failure rates. This raises a practical question: How are such eHealth networks to be effectively designed and implemented? This paper addresses this question. Specifically, it presents an ethnographic study of the Pan-African e-Network, a project which connects many hospitals all across India and Africa, providing medical teleconsultations and distance learning services. The study investigates the low utilisation of the network, an issue undermining its potential and efficiency. Factors contributing to this situation include communication barriers, the presumed ego of doctors, poor awareness of the project, and a lack of flexibility to work with the specificities of the connected sites. Above all, these factors point towards a dichotomous approach across the project's design and implementation, and taking two distinct yet related forms: (a) an ontological divide between technical and ‘non-technical’ domains; (b) a political sorting out of what is and what is not the project, aimed at neutralising and accounting for heterogeneous processes and practices. In both cases, low utilisation reveals tensions between processes of closure and control, and the openness of a life that will not be contained. Ultimately, this paper intends to destabilise binary modes of thinking as they crystallise oppositions between design and implementation, project and context, technical and social worlds, efficacy and improvisation, mastery and unruliness, map and territory.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Information TechnologySame topicICT in Developing CommunitiesFrench-language works237,207