Bibliographic record
Abstract
Telemedicine, in the form of online video consultations, holds great potential for the delivery of medical care. This research aims to investigate the extent of, rationale for, and the motivations for telemedicine use by homeopaths and naturopaths. State-regulated homeopaths and naturopaths in Ontario were surveyed. Survey questions captured telemedicine use, demographic and socio-economic data, and opinions regarding respondents’ motivations behind telemedicine use. The survey, conducted between October 2018-January 2019, had 183 homeopath and 366 naturopath respondents. Telemedicine consultations were performed by 65.6% of homeopaths and 32.5% of naturopaths in the previous 6 months. There were no significant differences between telemedicine users and non-users for gender, geographical location, and age. The best fit regression model of motivational factors comprised of attitude towards telemedicine and perceived ability to use telemedicine (Nagelkerke R-squared=.281). Telemedicine is used substantially by Ontario homeopaths. Attitude and perceived ability to use telemedicine were associated with telemedicine use.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".