MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989899073 · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v4i2.1132

Achieving quality primary care data: a description of the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network data capture, extraction, and processing in Alberta

2019· article· en· W2989899073 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Population Data Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Coding and Health Information
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData extractionDocumentationRaw dataData qualityComputer scienceData collectionAutomatic identification and data captureData scienceData miningMedicineDatabaseMEDLINEEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Electronic medical record (EMR) databases have become increasingly popular for secondary purposes, such as health research. The Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) is the first and only pan-Canadian primary care EMR data repository, with de-identified health information for almost two million Canadians. Comprehensive and freely available documentation describing the data 'lifecycle' is important for assessing potential data quality issues and appropriate interpretation of research findings. Here, we describe the flow and transformation of CPCSSN data in the province of Alberta. APPROACH: In Alberta, the data originate from 54 publicly-funded primary care settings, including one community pediatric clinic, with 318 providers contributing de-identified EMR data for 410,951 patients (as of December 2018). Data extraction methods have been developed for five different EMR systems, and include both backend and automated frontend extractions. The raw EMR data are transformed according to specific rules, including trimming implausible values, converting values and free text to standard terminologies or classification systems, and structuring the data into a common CPCSSN format. Following local data extraction and processing, the data are transferred to a central repository and made available for research and disease surveillance. CONCLUSION: This paper aims to provide important contextual information to future CPCSSN data users.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.291
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.198 · 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