Implementation methods of medical image sharing for collaborative health care based on IHE XDS-I profile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IHE XDS-I profile proposes an architecture model for cross-enterprise medical image sharing, but there are only a few clinical implementations reported. Here, we investigate three pilot studies based on the IHE XDS-I profile to see whether we can use this architecture as a foundation for image sharing solutions in a variety of health-care settings. The first pilot study was image sharing for cross-enterprise health care with federated integration, which was implemented in Huadong Hospital and Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital within the Shanghai Shen-Kang Hospital Management Center; the second pilot study was XDS-I-based patient-controlled image sharing solution, which was implemented by the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) team in the USA; and the third pilot study was collaborative imaging diagnosis with electronic health-care record integration in regional health care, which was implemented in two districts in Shanghai. In order to support these pilot studies, we designed and developed new image access methods, components, and data models such as RAD-69/WADO hybrid image retrieval, RSNA clearinghouse, and extension of metadata definitions in both the submission set and the cross-enterprise document sharing (XDS) registry. We identified several key issues that impact the implementation of XDS-I in practical applications, and conclude that the IHE XDS-I profile is a theoretically good architecture and a useful foundation for medical image sharing solutions across multiple regional health-care providers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".