MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2161354117 · doi:10.1109/cbms.2011.5999125

InfoFrame — An intelligent informatics data collection framework

2011· article· en· W2161354117 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Hamou, Jesse O'Brien, Stacey Guy, Femida Gwadry‐Sridhar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)UsabilityData collectionData scienceBridging (networking)Variety (cybernetics)InformaticsComputer securityHuman–computer interactionEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health care providers, clinicians and medical researchers are increasingly faced with heterogeneous data collection and reporting standards from a wide variety of public and private organizations. The storing and categorizing of clinical data related from multiple sources not only leads to several heterogeneous databases, but also results in difficulties in automating analysis on gathered datasets. In this work, a flexible real-time data collection framework that is able to adapt and lend itself to the multiple datasets without compromising future usability and research potential is presented. Features include the ability to easily connect and leverage current database systems with legacy data via bridging technologies, auto-complete of lookup listings from external sources (such as medication and physician repositories) and strict data validation on all data entry fields.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.435
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.081 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectronic Health Records Systems→French-language works237,207→