PADE: Supporting Collaborative Visual Analysis of Patient Administrative Systems Data with a Large Touch Display System
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present PADE, a visual analytics tool for collaboratively exploring data from patient administrative systems on large touch displays in meeting contexts. Large touch displays are becoming commercially available, but we have limited knowledge about how they might be used in such a context. We designed PADE based on inquiries with healthcare data analysts tasked with understanding expenses in a healthcare system that serve about six million residents. Our goals in designing the system were to enable the analysts to collaboratively construct hypotheses, quickly generate and execute strategies, and support ad hoc discussions and Q&A sessions during meetings. We created a set of interaction techniques that let users create new visualizations and combine parts of existing ones. We illustrate these possibilities through a collaborative analysis scenario. Finally, we discuss the possibilities and limitations of PADE, its interaction techniques, and future work in this direction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it