MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

H-DRIVE: A Big Health Data Analytics Platform for Evidence-Informed Decision Making

2015· article· en· W1605886311 on OpenAlexaff
Ashraf Abusharekh, Samuel A. Stewart, Nima Hashemian, Syed Sibte Raza Abidi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBig dataAnalyticsData scienceComputer scienceDashboardBusiness intelligenceContext (archaeology)Health careData analysisData visualizationWorkbenchVisualizationKnowledge managementData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Healthcare operations generates large volumes of data. Big data analytics methods are needed to derive actionable and decision-quality 'intelligence' from 'big' healthcare data in order to improve patient care. Given the technical challenges to big health data analytics, in this paper we present a specialized health analytics platform -- H-DRIVE (Health Data Reconciliation Inferencing and Visualization Environment). H-DRIVE is an integrated, end-to-end health data analytics service-oriented workbench designed to empower data analysts and researchers to design analytical experiments and then perform complex analytics on their health data. We present the high-level functional and technical architecture of H-DRIVE. As a case study, we demonstrate the application of H-DRIVE in the context of optimizing the operations of a provincial pathology lab, where we analyze province-wide lab orders to prepare scorecards outlining physician lab testing performance and offer an operational dashboard to provide an overview of lab utilization.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.341
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.134 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207