MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Identifying the Emerging e-Health Technologies To Ubiquity 2.0 and Beyond

2010· book-chapter· en· W2493496399 on OpenAlexaff
Sabah Mohammed, Jinan Fiaidhi

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilityCredentialHealth careComputer scienceEmerging technologiesKnowledge managementBusinessData scienceComputer securityWorld Wide WebPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Achieving improvements and optimum healthcare delivery has become a bipartisan top priority for several governments and institutions. The ability to meet this goal depends on the exchange of information within and across healthcare communities. The real challenge for any healthcare initiative is at the application level, where patient data may be stored on hundreds of different clinical systems such as lab, radiology, or pharmacy systems, and various clinical applications such as electronic medical record (EHRs), that use different protocols and schemas. In an attempt to overcome these challenges, many organizations have used enterprise-oriented integration platforms to transform and translate information so that disparate systems could exchange information internally and externally. However, the development and ongoing maintenance of such healthcare systems has become extremely expensive due to the growing complexity of healthcare organizations as they acquire more systems to meet clinical and business needs. As a result, healthcare communities continue to face the same challenge: how to achieve a level of interoperability for accessing all relevant information about a patient from a single point, which is universally becoming the Web, as well as to ensure accuracy, security, and privacy of all the relevant data. This chapter provides a roadmap solution based on the emerging web technologies that hold great promise for addressing these challenges. The roadmap is termed as the “ubiquity 2.0 trend.” This chapter also highlights the security challenges and the emerging web-oriented identity management technologies to provide a single, common user credential that is trusted, secure, and widely supported across the Web and within the healthcare enterprises.

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)0.004
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0130.031
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.006

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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