MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396893679 · doi:10.3897/pharmacia.71.e113509

Acceptance factors of telemedicine in times of COVID-19: Case Argentina

2024· article· en· W4396893679 on OpenAlexaff
Jorge Anibal Schlottke, Aldo Álvarez-Risco, Ezequiel Leandro Bertiche, Rocío Belén López, Carla Vanesa Torletti, Facundo Yamil del Hoyo, Shyla Del-Aguila-Arcentales, Christian R. Mejía, Mercedes Rojas-Osorio, Neal M. Davies, Jaime A. Yáñez

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)TelemedicineSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakPandemicComputer scienceGeographyVirologyMedicineHealth careEconomic growthOutbreakInternal medicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We performed an analytical, cross-sectional study of 285 consumers to assess the influence of social influence, resistance to use, facilitators to use, perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness of telemedicine on the intention to use telemedicine of citizens of Argentina in times of the pandemic by COVID-19. The proposed research model was analyzed using partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Perceived ease of use had a positive effect (0.624) on perceived usefulness; facilitating conditions had a positive effect (0.476) on usage intention; perceived risk (-0.062) and social influence (0.072) did not have an effect on usage intention. Bootstrapping showed that the beta coefficients were statistically significant. The outcomes may provide ideas to healthcare managers to know what an expectation about telemedicine is and develop new services directed to patients.

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)0.002
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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.367 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmaciaSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207