Gynecology Meets Big Data in the Disruptive Innovation Medical Era: State-of-Art and Future Prospects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tremendous scientific and technological achievements have been revolutionizing the current medical era, changing the way in which physicians practice their profession and deliver healthcare provisions. This is due to the convergence of various advancements related to digitalization and the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs)-ranging from the internet of things (IoT) and the internet of medical things (IoMT) to the fields of robotics, virtual and augmented reality, and massively parallel and cloud computing. Further progress has been made in the fields of addictive manufacturing and three-dimensional (3D) printing, sophisticated statistical tools such as big data visualization and analytics (BDVA) and artificial intelligence (AI), the use of mobile and smartphone applications (apps), remote monitoring and wearable sensors, and e-learning, among others. Within this new conceptual framework, big data represents a massive set of data characterized by different properties and features. These can be categorized both from a quantitative and qualitative standpoint, and include data generated from wet-lab and microarrays (molecular big data), databases and registries (clinical/computational big data), imaging techniques (such as radiomics, imaging big data) and web searches (the so-called infodemiology, digital big data). The present review aims to show how big and smart data can revolutionize gynecology by shedding light on female reproductive health, both in terms of physiology and pathophysiology. More specifically, they appear to have potential uses in the field of gynecology to increase its accuracy and precision, stratify patients, provide opportunities for personalized treatment options rather than delivering a package of "one-size-fits-it-all" healthcare management provisions, and enhance its effectiveness at each stage (health promotion, prevention, diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutics).
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".