MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Everyday Ethical Dilemmas Arising With Electronic Record Use in Primary Care

2011· article· en· W82231466 on OpenAlexafffund
Ellen Balka, Marianne Tolar

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWorkaroundWork (physics)Primary careElectronic medical recordCorporate governanceProcess (computing)NursingEngineering ethicsKnowledge managementProcess managementMedicineBusinessComputer scienceMedical emergencyEngineeringFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The introduction of electronic medical record systems (EMRs) into primary care settings alters work practices, introduces new challenges, and new roles. In the process of integrating an EMR into a primary care setting, clinic staff faced ethical challenges in their everyday work practices resulting from workarounds undertaken to compensate for a poor fit between system design and work practices, issues related to system access, and governance gaps. Examples of these issues are presented, and implications for system design 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)0.197
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.339
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1970.339
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0310.046
Scholarly communication0.0220.013
Open science0.0030.016
Research integrity0.0160.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informaticsSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207