MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Influence of National Factors on Transferring and Adopting Telemedicine Technology

2019· book-chapter· en· W4237541398 on OpenAlexaff
Fariba Latifi, Somayeh Alizadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelemedicineEconomic shortageInformation and Communications TechnologyBusinessHealth careInformation technologyNational PolicyPublic relationsKnowledge managementMarketingPolitical scienceEconomic growthGovernment (linguistics)Computer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Telemedicine has drawn increasing attention as a beneficial healthcare delivery medium, especially in developing countries that struggle with physician and health professional shortages, through providing health services in remote areas. This paper presents the findings of a survey conducted to investigate the national factors influencing the adoption of telemedicine technology in Iran, as a less developed country. Designing a self-administered questionnaire the data were collected from the Chief Information Officers (CIOs) of Iranian healthcare system. The findings indicate that political factors such as Information and Communication Technology (ICT) policies, national data security policies, national e-health policies, national ICT infrastructures and rational decision-making, along with organizational factors such as organizational readiness and implementation effectiveness, are positively associated with telemedicine capability in Iran. However, no evidence was found to support the direct impact of cultural factors on transferring telemedicine technology in the country.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooks→Same topicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation→French-language works237,207→