MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970840185 · doi:10.1145/1859823.1859832

Standards for physiological data transmission and archiving for the support of the service of critical care

2009· article· en· W1970840185 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGBED Review · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceService (business)Transmission (telecommunications)External Data RepresentationData transmissionData scienceMedicineBusinessTelecommunicationsComputer hardware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Physiological data is monitored and displayed on medical devices around the world every day, and the volume of this data is steadily increasing and newer monitoring devices enter the clinical setting. However, the vast majority of this data is lost since it is most often displayed once as it is recorded, perhaps replayed one or more times while it exists in the device's volatile memory. What little data that is permanently recorded is most commonly saved through hand written annotations, in paper records and in some limited samples stored on hospital clinical information systems. Meanwhile, current methods of data analysis provide opportunities to utilize this data for improved care of these same critical care patients. A major inhibitor to this becoming reality is the lack of standards for the representation, transmission and storage of physiological data. HL7, for example, does not include definitions for time series data. Research into the use of these data will soon be reaching the clinical setting and the need for such standards to be defined is becoming urgent.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.282 · 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