MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134163688 · doi:10.5772/6413

Data and Mined-Knowledge Interoperability in eHealth Systems

2008· book-chapter· en· W2134163688 on OpenAlexaff
Kamran Sartipi, Mehran Najafi, Reza Salehi

Bibliographic record

VenueInTech eBooks · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilityeHealthHealth careInformation systemKnowledge managementComputer scienceComputer securityBusinessProcess managementEngineeringWorld Wide WebPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data Mining in Medical and Biological Research 160 seamlessly to allow healthcare professionals and administration to use the available services effectively and efficiently. Also, we pay particular attention to the current research activities and issues regarding to the interoperbility of information and knowledge extracted from data mining operations. We propose a new architecture for interoperability of data and mined-knowledge (knowledge extracted from data mining algorithms). Finally, we propose new research avenues on the combination of data mining, eHealth, and service oriented architecture and discuss their characteristics. The structure of this chapter is as follows: Section 2 presents the application of data mining in healthcare. Section 3 introduces different forms of knowledge representations in medical domain. Section 4, describes messaging standards in this domain. After these introductions to knowledge and messaging standards, we propose our framework in Section 5. In Section 6 an architecture for the framework is discussed and finally in Section 7, some research avenues are elaborated for applying our framework on the architecture that is explained in Section 6. We conclude the discussion of the chapter in Section 8.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.264 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInTech eBooksSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207