MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6887932848 · doi:10.18130/b49k-xy58

IT vendors’ legitimation strategies and market share: The case of EMR systems

2022· article· en· W6887932848 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibra · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Systems Theories and Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegitimationLegitimacyNormativeElectronic marketsDiscourse analysisCategorization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the legitimation strategies adopted by information technology (IT) vendors and their respective influence on market share. We conducted an analysis of the public discourse on websites of top Electronic Medical Record (EMR) vendors in Ontario, Canada. A total of 815 segments extracted from these websites were analyzed. Our findings indicate that strategies under the cognitive and pragmatic forms of legitimacy were strongly represented in the EMR vendors’ discourses compared with regulative and normative strategies. Furthermore, the link between legitimation strategies and market share has not yet been clearly established. Implications for practice and research are discussed.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0100.023
Scholarly communication0.0140.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0040.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibraSame topicInformation Systems Theories and ImplementationFrench-language works237,207