MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015485633 · doi:10.1109/titb.2012.2191295

Link Technologies and BlackBerry Mobile Health (mHealth) Solutions: A Review

2012· review· en· W2015485633 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Body Area Networks
Canadian institutionsHuawei Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsmHealtheHealthTelemedicineWearable computerComputer scienceMobile technologyTelecommunicationsMobile computingMobile phoneMobile deviceMobile telephonyHealth careInternet privacyMultimediaComputer securityWorld Wide WebMobile radioEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of wearable wireless sensors is expected to grow to 400 million by the year 2014, while the number of operational mobile subscribers has already passed the 5.2 billion mark in 2011. This growth results in an increasing number of mobile applications including: Machine-to-Machine (M2M) communications, Electronic-Health (eHealth), and Mobile-Health (mHealth). A number of emerging mobile applications that require 3G and 4G mobile networks for data transport relate to telemedicine, including establishing, maintaining, and transmitting health-related information, research, education, and training. This review paper takes a closer look at these applications, specifically with regard to the healthcare industry and their underlying link technologies. The authors believe that the BlackBerry platform and the associated infrastructure (i.e., BlackBerry Enterprise Server) is a logical and practical solution for eHealth, mHealth, sensor and M2M deployments, which are considered in this paper.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.270 · 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