MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116094367 · doi:10.1260/2040-2295.3.2.323

Requirements for Interoperability in Healthcare Information Systems

2012· article· en· W2116094367 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Healthcare Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInteroperabilityHealth careInformation systemComputer scienceHealthcare systemData scienceWorld Wide WebKnowledge managementEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interoperability is a requirement for the successful deployment of Electronic Health Records (EHR). EHR improves the quality of healthcare by enabling access to all relevant information at the diagnostic decision moment, regardless of location. It is a system that results from the cooperation of several heterogeneous distributed subsystems that need to successfully exchange information relative to a specific healthcare process. This paper analyzes interoperability impediments in healthcare by first defining them and providing concrete healthcare examples, followed by discussion of how specifications can be defined and how verification can be conducted to eliminate those impediments and ensure interoperability in healthcare. This paper also analyzes how Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) has been successful in enabling interoperability, and identifies some neglected aspects that need attention.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.240 · 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