MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283712752 · doi:10.3390/jpm12071057

Telemedicine as an Untapped Opportunity for Parkinson’s Nurses Training in Personalized Care Approaches

2022· article· en· W4283712752 on OpenAlexaff
Marlena van Munster, Johanne Stümpel, Timo Clemens, Katarzyna Czabanowska, David J. Pedrosa, Tiago Mestre

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Personalized Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersAgence Nationale de la RechercheEU Joint Programme – Neurodegenerative Disease Research
KeywordsMedicineQualitative researchNursingTelemedicineMedical educationKnowledge managementHealth careComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(1) Background: Parkinson nurses (PN) take over important functions in the telemedical care of person's with Parkinson's disease (PwPs). This requires special competencies that have so far been largely unexplored. The aim of the article is to identify competencies of PN operating in a personalized care model. (2) Methods: This study employed a qualitative approach. Based on the competency framework for telenursing, PN were asked about their competencies using a qualitative online survey. (3) Results: The results show that PN need competencies on a personal and organizational level, as well as in the relationship with PwPs. PN have developed these skills through professional exchange, training, and personal experience. In addition, both hindering and beneficial factors for the development of competencies could be identified. (4) Conclusions: Competency development for telemedical care is complex and must be designed and promoted in a targeted manner.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Personalized MedicineSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207