MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151330823 · doi:10.3414/me0574

Clinical Decision Support System for Point of Care Use

2009· article· en· W2151330823 on OpenAlexafffund
Ken Farion, Wojtek Michalowski, Dympna O’Sullivan, S. Rubin, Dawid Weiss, Szymon Wilk

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods of Information in Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsComputer scienceTriageExecutableClinical decision support systemOntologyDecision support systemPoint of careSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligenceOperating systemMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this research was to design a clinical decision support system (CDSS) that supports heterogeneous clinical decision problems and runs on multiple computing platforms. Meeting this objective required a novel design to create an extendable and easy to maintain clinical CDSS for point of care support. The proposed solution was evaluated in a proof of concept implementation. METHODS: Based on our earlier research with the design of a mobile CDSS for emergency triage we used ontology-driven design to represent essential components of a CDSS. Models of clinical decision problems were derived from the ontology and they were processed into executable applications during runtime. This allowed scaling applications' functionality to the capabilities of computing platforms. A prototype of the system was implemented using the extended client-server architecture and Web services to distribute the functions of the system and to make it operational in limited connectivity conditions. RESULTS: The proposed design provided a common framework that facilitated development of diversified clinical applications running seamlessly on a variety of computing platforms. It was prototyped for two clinical decision problems and settings (triage of acute pain in the emergency department and postoperative management of radical prostatectomy on the hospital ward) and implemented on two computing platforms--desktop and handheld computers. CONCLUSIONS: The requirement of the CDSS heterogeneity was satisfied with ontology-driven design. Processing of application models described with the help of ontological models allowed having a complex system running on multiple computing platforms with different capabilities. Finally, separation of models and runtime components contributed to improved extensibility and maintainability of the system.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.006

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations33
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods of Information in MedicineSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207