MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150185449 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2008.4650167

Integration of new technology in a legacy system for collecting medical data - challenges and lessons learned

2008· article· en· W2150185449 on OpenAlexaff
Jeff Gilchrist, Monique Frize, Erika Bariciak, Daphne Townsend

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of OttawaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegacy systemComputer scienceSystem integrationData scienceSoftware engineeringSystems engineeringEngineering managementEngineeringSoftwareDatabaseOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrating new technology into a legacy medical system can be very challenging. Completely new systems cannot always be built due to the high cost of medical equipment, thus integrating some new technology into an existing system may be required. This paper looks at the issues and challenges surrounding the integration of new components into a legacy system for collecting medical data. We discuss how the issues were solved, the lessons learned, and how future upgrades can be made more easily.

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)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.086
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.086
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.025
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.468
GPT teacher head0.532
Teacher spread0.064 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207