MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experiences from Health Information System Implementation Projects Reported in Canada Between 1991 and 1997

2002· book-chapter· en· W4236367474 on OpenAlexaffabout
Francis C. M. Lau, Marilynne Hebert

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in end user computing series/Advances in end user computing (AEUC) book series · 2002
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation systemHealth informaticsKnowledge managementInformaticsProcess (computing)Health sectorResource (disambiguation)BusinessHealth informationProcess managementPublic relationsHealth careEngineeringPolitical scienceComputer scienceMedicineHealth servicesEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada’s Health Informatics Association has been hosting annual conferences since the 1970’s as a way of bringing information systems professionals, health practitioners, policy makers, researchers, and industry together to share their ideas and experiences in the use of information systems in the health sector. This paper describes our findings on the outcome of information systems implementation projects reported at these conferences in the 1990’s. Fifty implementation projects published in the conference proceedings were reviewed, and the authors or designates of 24 of these projects were interviewed. The overall experiences, which are consistent with existing implementation literature, suggest the need for organizational commitment; resource support and training; managing project, change process, and communication; organizational/user involvement and teams approach; system capability; information quality; and demonstrable positive consequences from computerization.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.008
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.323 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in end user computing series/Advances in end user computing (AEUC) book seriesSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207