Visual Analytics for Electronic Health Records: A Review
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
The increasing use of electronic health record (EHR)-based systems has led to the generation of clinical data at an unprecedented rate, which produces an untapped resource for healthcare experts to improve the quality of care. Despite the growing demand for adopting EHRs, the large amount of clinical data has made some analytical and cognitive processes more challenging. The emergence of a type of computational system called visual analytics has the potential to handle information overload challenges in EHRs by integrating analytics techniques with interactive visualizations. In recent years, several EHR-based visual analytics systems have been developed to fulfill healthcare experts’ computational and cognitive demands. In this paper, we conduct a systematic literature review to present the research papers that describe the design of EHR-based visual analytics systems and provide a brief overview of 22 systems that met the selection criteria. We identify and explain the key dimensions of the EHR-based visual analytics design space, including visual analytics tasks, analytics, visualizations, and interactions. We evaluate the systems using the selected dimensions and identify the gaps and areas with little prior work.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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