MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094157657 · doi:10.1136/ebnurs-2020-103332

Developing nurse-friendly digital technology can enhance its use in healthcare

2020· letter· en· W3094157657 on OpenAlexaff
Sumeeta Kapoor, Lynn Acheson

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Nursing · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsAlberta HealthFoothills Medical CentreAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaceHealth careWork (physics)NursingHealth technologyDigital healthPsychologyMedicineEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Implications for practice and research► Technology experts, policy-makers and health managers should engage nurses while developing and implementing digital technology in healthcare.► Nurse-friendly digital technology and automation should be factored in future research.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.086
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.086
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0390.030
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.008

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based NursingSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207