MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060161003 · doi:10.1145/1882992.1883029

Towards a definition of health informatics ethics

2010· article· en· W2060161003 on OpenAlexaff
Hamman Samuel, Osmar R. Zai͏̈ane, Dick Sobsey

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfidentialityInformation ethicsHealth informaticsInformaticsEngineering ethicsHealth careNursing ethicsComputer ethicsInformation technologyHealth Administration InformaticsEthical issuesMedical ethicsInformation systemHealth information technologyKnowledge managementComputer sciencePolitical scienceMeta-ethicsComputer securityEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information technology is a prominent tool in healthcare management. However, healthcare systems often fall short of addressing concerns about privacy, confidentiality and safety of information. Even though there is existing literature on ethical issues in medicine, as well as ethics in computing, information technology in medicine leads to new ethical issues that are not covered by medical or computing ethics. We define the term ‘health informatics ethics ’ to encompass ethical issues resulting from the use of technology in managing healthcare information. We also investigate the application of our proposed definition to not only resolving ethical conflicts, but also preventing conflicts. Categories and Subject Descriptors K.7.4 [The Computing Profession]: Professional ethics— codes of ethics; K.4.1 [Computers and Society]: Public

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.034
Scholarly communication0.0140.014
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0120.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.730
GPT teacher head0.645
Teacher spread0.086 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207