MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Privacy Gaps for Digital Cardiology Data

2020· article· en· W3006786673 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica R. Golbus, W. Nicholson Price, Brahmajee K. Nallamothu

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)Lawson Health Research Institute
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNovo Nordisk Fonden
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionDigital healthInternal medicineFamily medicineLibrary scienceLawHealth carePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mr. M is a 55 year-old man who suffers an acute myocardial infarction (MI) and undergoes coronary stenting. Following hospitalization, he completes cardiac rehabilitation. Thereafter, he is approached about joining a digital smartwatch study to help monitor his health behaviors. He enrolls with enthusiasm, and, feeling empowered, creates a profile on PatientsLikeMe to share lessons from his medical journey. There he reads about an over-the-counter vitamin and downloads a coupon for his local supermarket. Determined to remain accountable for his health, he starts exercising with a fitness trainer and provides her with heart rate data from his smartwatch. He also downloads a mobile nutrition application she recommends.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0200.047
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.196 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207