MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328712653 · doi:10.5963/ber0301001

Synchronization of Medical Data in a Mobile Provisioning Environment: mHealth Use Case

2014· article· en· W2328712653 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard K. Lomotey, Ralph Deters

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Engineering Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProvisioningSynchronization (alternating current)mHealthComputer scienceData synchronizationComputer networkMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets, as well as other Information and Communications Technology (ICT) tools, to facilitate healthcare delivery in the medical landscape, known as mHealth, has risen phenomenally. In most mHealth systems, mobile devices are employed as services and health information client consumers. Meaning, physicians use these devices to access the Electronic Health Record (EHR) which resides on back-end platforms. However, in a research collaboration with the Geriatrics Ward of the City Hospital in Saskatoon, Canada, we have identified a huge potential for facilitating the mobile device as a medical data hosting node. Our approach is beneficial for collecting the EHR remotely and pushing it to the Health Information System (HIS). For instance, Geriatrics' patients who are home can be attended to outside of the health facility since their medical data is being retrieved from or pushed to the HIS remotely. However, mobile devices communicate over wireless mediums, which can experience intermittent loss of connectivity. It is also possible to visit the patient's home, and there not be any connectivity. These situations can cause an inconsistency between the data that is on the physician's mobile device and the data on the HIS. Our work therefore proposes a cloud-powered middleware architecture that facilitates the synchronization of the data between the mobile devices and the HIS in soft real-time. The middleware employs the propagation of deltas and timestamp to determine which of the data is the newest update in any direction and ensures that all the operations are in sync. The evaluation of our proposed system shows minimal latency.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Engineering ResearchSame topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207