Role of Artificial Intelligence within the Telehealth Domain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This paper provides a discussion about the potential scope of applicability of Artificial Intelligence methods within the telehealth domain. These methods are focussed on clinical needs and provide some insight to current directions, based on reports of recent advances. METHODS: Examples of telehealth innovations involving Artificial Intelligence to support or supplement remote health care delivery were identified from recent literature by the authors, on the basis of expert knowledge. Observations from the examples were synthesized to yield an overview of contemporary directions for the perceived role of Artificial Intelligence in telehealth. RESULTS: Two major focus areas for related contemporary directions were established. These were first, quality improvement for existing clinical practice and service delivery, and second, the development and support of new models of care. Case studies from each focus area have been chosen for illustration purposes. CONCLUSION: Examples of the role of Artificial Intelligence in delivery of health care remotely include use of tele-assessment, tele-diagnosis, tele-interactions, and tele-monitoring. Further developments of underlying algorithms and validation of methods will be required for wider adoption. Certain key social and ethical considerations also need consideration more generally in the health system, as Artificial-Intelligence-enabled-telehealth becomes more commonplace.
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 | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".