MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898265435 · doi:10.1007/s10278-018-0134-3

Active Learning of the HL7 Medical Standard

2018· article· en· W2898265435 on OpenAlexafffund
Rita Noumeir

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Digital Imaging · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceInteroperabilityDocumentationSoftwareHealth careSoftware engineeringData scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health Level Seven (HL7®) is a standard for exchanging information between medical information systems. It is widely deployed and covers the exchange of information in several functional domains. It is very important and crucial to achieve interoperability in healthcare. HL7 competences are needed by all professionals touching information technology in healthcare. However, learning the standard has always been long and difficult due to its large breadth as well as to large and complex documentation. In this paper, we describe an innovative active learning approach based on solving problems from real clinical scenarios to learn the HL7 standard, quickly. We present the clinical scenarios used to achieve learning. For each scenario, we describe and discuss the learning objectives, clinical problem, clinical data, scaffolding introduction to the standard, software used, and the work required from the students. We present and discuss the results obtained by implementing the proposed approach during several semesters as part of a graduate course. Our proposed method has proven that HL7 can be learned quickly. We were successful in enabling students of different backgrounds to gain confidence and get familiar with a complex healthcare standard without the need for any software development skill.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.307 · 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
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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Digital ImagingSame topicProblem and Project Based LearningFrench-language works237,207