Empowering Patients and Caregivers to Manage Healthcare Via Streamlined Presentation of Web Objects Selected by Modeling Learning Benefits Obtained by Similar Peers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we introduce a framework for selecting web objects (texts, videos, simulations) from a large online repository to present to patients and caregivers, in order to assist in their healthcare. Motivated by the paradigm of peer-based intelligent tutoring, we model the learning gains achieved by users when exposed to specific web objects in order to recommend those objects most likely to deliver benefit to new users. We are able to show that this streamlined presentation leads to effective knowledge gains, both through a process of simulated learning and through a user study, for the specific application of caring for children with autism. The value of our framework for peer-driven content selection of health information is emphasized through two additional roles for peers: attaching commentary to web objects and proposing subdivided objects for presentation, both of which are demonstrated to deliver effective learning gains, in simulations. In all, we are offering an opportunity for patients to navigate the deep waters of excessive online information towards effective management of healthcare, through content selection influenced by previous peer experiences.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".