MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W136142414

Web-based electronic health information systems for prostate cancer patients.

2005· article· en· W136142414 on OpenAlexaff
Howard Pai, Francis Lau

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetMedicineHealth careProstate cancerFamily medicineFocus groupWeb applicationRanking (information retrieval)Internet privacyWorld Wide WebMedical educationCancerComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Providing men with prostate cancer (MPC) timely access to their health records and information (HRI) can enhance their ability to understand their condition and engage in shared medical decision making with their health care provider (HCP). The Internet is a potential means of enhancing such interactions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two surveys were conducted at a PC support group in Victoria, BC to identify the health information needs of MPC and the ability to access their HRI. Another objective was to identify the potential role of web-enabled HRI systems at meeting these needs. Sixty-one participants (41 men and 18 spouses/significant others (SS)) completed the first convenience survey and 16 participants then took part in a focus group meeting using a second questionnaire. RESULTS: The majority of men (median age 70 years) were knowledgeable with the computer and Internet. The majority of men (75%) desired the ability to access their HRI through means other than by meeting with their HCP, with the Internet ranking as one of the most desired methods. There was broad interest in accessing various parts of their health record and during different phases of their care. Most men were willing to try a personalized patient web-enabled HRI system. Over 70% of SS desired the ability to access their men's HRI. CONCLUSIONS: The surveys indicate that the Internet is a desirable means of accessing electronic HRI and support the potential role of web-enabled HRI systems for PC 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.005

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207