MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381085512 · doi:10.48047/jcdr.2021.12.02.94

The Role of IT Governance in Shaping Organizations’ Technology Adoption Decision

2023· article· en· W4381085512 on OpenAlexaff
J. S. Chauhan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Disease Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsCentre for International Governance Innovation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessKnowledge managementPublic relationsProcess managementPolitical scienceComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adoption of new technology is crucial for an organization's existence since it decreases the likelihood of human mistake while increasing productivity and communication speed.Every firm must pick the right technology and implement different tactics to increase performance and efficiency to thrive in the cutthroat market.The head of an enterprise often plays a key role in choosing and implementing appropriate technology.There are appropriate laws, norms, and governances that aid in comprehending the fundamental structure behind the adoption of new technologies.Its governance is under the control of the board of directors or senior management.Enterprise governance, which comprises of organizational structure, leadership, and policies, needs it as a key component.It ensures both the aims and objectives underpinning the technology acceptance model as well as the adoption of new technology.The board of directors, who have the primary power inside an organization, oversees determining how much it will cost to run that business and how productive it will be.The task also includes determining what requirements must be met to survive in a cutthroat market.The right application of codes and practises that can direct the board in choosing the most appropriate technology to fulfil the objectives is necessary since technology is always evolving.A good IT governance framework is required for assessing the rules and regulations for the appropriate usage of technology.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular Disease ResearchSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207