MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982503935 · doi:10.2196/14019

Visual Analytic Tools and Techniques in Population Health and Health Services Research: Protocol for a Scoping Review

2019· review· en· W2982503935 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of WaterlooCanadian Institute for Health InformationUniversity of WaterlooBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster UniversityUniversity of CalgaryCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchImpactUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkInstitute of Health Services and Policy ResearchOntario Neurotrauma FoundationToronto Rehabilitation Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)Population healthPopulationComputer scienceData sciencePsychologyApplied psychologyMedical educationMedicineAlternative medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Visual analytics (VA) promotes the understanding of data using visual, interactive techniques and using analytic and visual engines. The analytic engine includes machine learning and other automated techniques, whereas common visual outputs include flow maps and spatiotemporal hotspots for studying service gaps and disease distribution. The principal objective of this scoping review is to examine the state of science on VA and the various tools, strategies, and frameworks used in population health and health services research (HSR). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this scoping review is to develop an overarching global view of established techniques, frameworks, and methods of VA in population health and HSR. The main objectives are to explore, map, and synthesize the literature related to VA in its application to the two main focus areas of health care. METHODS: We will use established scoping review methods to meet the study objective. As the use of the term visual analytics is inconsistent, one of the major challenges was operationalizing the concepts for developing the search strategy, based on the three main concepts of population health, HSR, and VA. We included peer reviewed and grey literature sources from 2005 till March 2019 in the search. Independent teams of researchers will screen the titles, abstracts and full text articles, whereas an independent researcher will arbiter conflicts. Data will be abstracted and presented using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist and explanation by two independent researchers. RESULTS: As of late August 2019, the scoping review is in the full-text screening stage. Data synthesis will follow and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in December 2019. In this protocol, the methods for undertaking this scoping review are detailed. We present how we operationalized the varied concepts of population health, health services, and VA. The main results of the scoping review will synthesize peer reviewed and grey literature sources on the main methods of VA in the interrelated fields of population health and health services research from January 2005 till March 2019. CONCLUSIONS: VA is being increasingly used and integrated with emerging technologies to support decision making using large data sets. This scoping review of the VA tools, strategies, and frameworks applied to population health and health services aims to increase awareness of this approach for uptake by decision makers working within and toward developing learning health systems globally. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/14019.

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.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.743
GPT teacher head0.736
Teacher spread0.007 · 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