MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096250699 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2020.575975

Technology-Enabled Care: Integrating Multidisciplinary Care in Parkinson's Disease Through Digital Technology

2020· review· en· W3096250699 on OpenAlexaff
Raquel Luis-Martínez, Mariana H.G. Monje, Angelo Antonini, Álvaro Sánchez‐Ferro, Tiago Mestre

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersInstituto de Salud Carlos III
KeywordsMultidisciplinary approachParkinson's diseaseMedicineDiseaseComputer scienceSociologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson's disease (PD) management requires the involvement of movement disorders experts, other medical specialists, and allied health professionals. Traditionally, multispecialty care has been implemented in the form of a multidisciplinary center, with an inconsistent clinical benefit and health economic impact. With the current capabilities of digital technologies, multispecialty care can be reshaped to reach a broader community of people with PD in their home and community. Digital technologies have the potential to connect patients with the care team beyond the traditional sparse clinical visit, fostering care continuity and accessibility. For example, video conferencing systems can enable the remote delivery of multispecialty care. With big data analyses, wearable and non-wearable technologies using artificial intelligence can enable the remote assessment of patients' conditions in their natural home environment, promoting a more comprehensive clinical evaluation and empowering patients to monitor their disease. These advances have been defined as technology-enabled care (TEC). We present examples of TEC under development and describe the potential challenges to achieve a full integration of technology to address complex care needs in PD.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations72
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207