MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281563879 · doi:10.1080/20476965.2022.2075797

Assessing the maturity and performance of the IT function in acute-care hospitals: a configurational view

2022· article· en· W4281563879 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Manon G. Guillemette, Louis Raymond, Guy Paré

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsHEC MontréalUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersHEC Montréal
KeywordsMaturity (psychological)Acute careFunction (biology)MedicineHealth administrationHealth informaticsNursingHealth carePsychologyPublic healthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to characterises the maturity of IT management in hospitals, to identify the IT management configurations needed to achieve greater performance and to characterise the organisational and strategic IT contexts in which these configurations evolve. Drawing on survey data from 72 Canadian acute-care hospitals with the CIO as the main respondent, we used a configurational approach to assess the maturity of their IT functions. We classified participating hospitals in two distinct groups, each related to different levels of performance. Hospitals in the first group are characterised by a rather "immature" IT management model and presented low levels of IT performance. Hospitals in the second group showed more maturity in their IT management model and high levels of IT performance. Importantly, both the strategic influence of the CIO and the centrality of IT to the hospital's strategic goals were found to be significantly greater in the mature group.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth SystemsSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207