MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2419190659 · doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-574-6-26

The Consumer Health Information System Adoption Model

2015· article· en· W2419190659 on OpenAlexaff
Helen Monkman, André Kushniruk

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordseHealthUsabilityHealth literacyLiteracyKnowledge managementBusinessAffect (linguistics)MarketingComputer sciencePsychologyHealth careHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Derived from overlapping concepts in consumer health, a consumer health information system refers to any of the broad range of applications, tools, and educational resources developed to empower consumers with knowledge, techniques, and strategies, to manage their own health. As consumer health information systems become increasingly popular, it is important to explore the factors that impact their adoption and success. Accumulating evidence indicates a relationship between usability and consumers' eHealth Literacy skills and the demands consumer HISs place on their skills. Here, we present a new model called the Consumer Health Information System Adoption Model, which depicts both consumer eHealth literacy skills and system demands on eHealth literacy as moderators with the potential to affect the strength of relationship between usefulness and usability (predictors of usage) and adoption, value, and successful use (actual usage outcomes). Strategies for aligning these two moderating factors are described.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations30
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informaticsSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207