LB03.06
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Hy-Result® software is designed to help patients to comply with the home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) protocol and self-interpret their results. We compare in a daily routine care setting, the classification generated by Hy-Result® with the physician's clinical evaluation. Design and method: The algorithm combines BP readings with patient's characteristics. According to the ESH guidelines, BP readings and automatically generated text messages are made available to the patient in a report. The primary assessment criterion was whether classification of the BP status generated by the software concurred with the physician's classification (blinded to the software's results) following a consultation (n = 195 patients) (gold standard). Results: In the 58 untreated patients, the agreement between classification of the BP status generated by the software and the physician's classification was 87.9%. In the 137 treated patients, the agreement was 91.9%. The kappa test applied for all the patients was 0.81 [95%CI: 0.73–0.89]. After correction of errors identified in the algorithm during the study, agreement increased to 95.4% (kappa 0.9[95% CI: 0.84–0.97]). For 100% of the patients with comorbidities (n = 46), specific text messages were generated indicating that a physician might recommend a target BP lower than 135/85 mmHg. Specific text messages were also generated for 100% of the patients for whom global cardiovascular risks greatly exceeded norms relating to BMI, tobacco and/or alcohol consumption. Remaining discrepancies were more attributable to human error (physician), than software. The limitation is that the algorithm remains dependent on patient's capacity to complete their profile. Conclusions: Classification by Hy-Result® is at least as accurate as that of a specialist in current practice. Hy-Result® is the first validated free use software for self-interpretation of HBPM results, taking into account both the recommended thresholds for normal values and patient characteristics (www.hy-result.com). Hy-Result® will soon be available as a Smartphone application (Health Mate), accessible in an entirely automated format in conjunction with a validated wireless BP monitor (Withings BP-800).
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.800 | 0.805 |
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".