A Scoping Literature Review of Rural Beliefs and Attitudes toward Telehealth Utilization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this scoping literature review was to understand what is known about how the rural profile influences beliefs regarding telehealth utilization. Rural nursing theory (RNT) provided a framework for the review. Search criteria were limited to peer-reviewed studies conducted in Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. A variety of search terms related to patient telehealth perceptions generated 213 unique articles, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. Included studies incorporated qualitative methodologies and were from Australia, Canada, Sweden, or the United States. The review highlighted four themes related to the rural profile's influence on telehealth beliefs: importance of familiar relationships, concerns with privacy and confidentiality, acceptance of limited access to care, and resourcefulness and frugality. These themes echo concepts within RNT. Nurses and other health professionals must acknowledge the rural profile's influence on a person's decision to use telehealth in order to provide optimal care.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it