Special Interest: What are we really communicating? Digital Health and Data Enabling Integrated Care Special Interest Group Workshop
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Digital Health and Data Enabling Integrated Care SIG members have been working together on the priority area of interoperability. A key international challenge is around standardizing information sharing, including identifying what data is shared and how information maintains its value as it moves across professional and organizational boundaries.To refine and build on the previous two SIG meetings that have focused on the challenge of interoperability, this workshop will help to establish a process for creating Minimum Data Sets for integrated care to streamline interoperability efforts. Delegates will not only engage in an exercise to help identify a minimum data set from the International Patient Summary, but will learn a transferable process that they can apply to other data and information resources in their own networks.AudienceAll existing and newly interested members of the SIG are welcome. Our growing membership consists of patients and family caregivers, researchers, frontline providers, managers, system leaders and decision-makers, policy makers, informaticians, and industry partners. We are particularly keen to grow our North American membership at NACIC24 in Calgary. Approach: The session will begin with a short introduction from SIG leads (C. Steele Gray, L. Lewis, I. Meyer) who will provide a summary of current global standardization efforts, such as the use of openEHR and SNOMED-CT including a specific example from Estonia. SIG guest Matthew Meyer will then present the approach being taken by the Middlesex London Ontario Health Team around developing a Minimum Data Set to guide their interoperability efforts across organizational partners.Delegates in the session will then break into small working groups to go through the exercise where they work from an existing standard, the International Patient Summary, and identify what information is needed for which type of partner (patient/carer, primary care hospital, home care, social and community services, etc...), to establish a Minimum Data Set for this summary. Delegates will then be asked to review the standard and discuss the ease of standardization, and the benefits/risks of including different components for different partners. Finally, delegates will recommend prioritization of elements. Facilitators will guide delegates through the process, using sticky notes and stickers to record and prioritize ideas.Structure: ) Introduction and data standardization overview (5 minutes); 2) Matt Meyer presentation (5 minutes); 3) Table Discussions (25 minutes); 4) Report back (5 minutes)OutcomesWhile there is only 5 minutes set aside for a report back, the facilitators will collect all the work generated by the tables to be included in a white paper report that is being generated by the SIG leads in collaboration with members on "Interoperability for Integrated Care" which is being built from the SIG meetings on this topic from the last two years. Patient and family carer involvement has be significant in past workshops, including the ICIC24 workshop which was co-developed and co-led with a patient partner who is an ongoing active member. And we will be inviting patient and family carer delegates interested in digital health to support this workshop activity. This final session will round out the report, offering what the delegates worked on in the session, but also presenting a potentially transferable process for developing minimum data sets that can be applied by other organizations working on this challenge. The SIG anticipates releasing the white paper by the end of 2024.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,013 | 0,015 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,012 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,009 | 0,013 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,041 | 0,018 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».