MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080705305 · doi:10.3928/00989134-20200811-03

Family- and Person-Centered Interdisciplinary Telehealth: Policy and Practice Implications Following Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic

2020· article· en· W3080705305 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

VenueJournal of Gerontological Nursing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Institute of Nursing ResearchNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsTelehealthPandemicEquity (law)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)NursingFamily centered care2019-20 coronavirus outbreakPublic relationsPsychologyTelemedicinePolitical scienceMedicineHealth careLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth was thrust to the forefront, becoming one of the most predominant forms of care almost overnight. Despite years of research, practice, and policymaking, tenets for providing telehealth in an interdisciplinary, family- and person-centered fashion, and across a wide breadth of settings remain underdeveloped. In addition, although telehealth has the potential to increase equity in care, it can also further exacerbate disparities. The current article discusses the opening created by the pandemic and provides recommendations for how to make permanent changes in telehealth policy and practice to allow for interdisciplinary, person- and family-centered care while also taking care to address issues of equity and ethics and privacy issues related to telehealth and remote monitoring. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 46(9), 9-13.].

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.442
GPT teacher head0.525
Teacher spread0.083 · 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