MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199836852 · doi:10.2196/32446

The Significance of Alliance Networks in Research and Development of Digital Health Products for Diabetes: Observational Study

2021· article· en· W3199836852 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Satoru Kikuchi, Kota Kodama, Shintaro Sengoku

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Diabetes · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
KeywordsCentralityBetweenness centralityBusinessAllianceIndustrial organizationMarketingKnowledge managementComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Digital health has been advancing owing to technological progress by means of smart devices and artificial intelligence, among other developments. In the field of diabetes especially, there are many active use cases of digital technology supporting the treatment of diabetes and improving lifestyle. In the innovation ecosystem, new alliance networks are formed not only by medical device companies and pharmaceutical companies, but also by information and communications technology companies and start-ups. While understanding and utilizing the network structure is important to increase the competitive advantage of companies, there is a lack of previous research describing the structure of alliance networks and the factors that lead to their formation in digital health. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the significance of alliance networks, focusing on digital health for diabetes, in effectively implementing processes, from the research and development of products or services to their launch and market penetration. METHODS: First, we listed the companies and contracts related to digital health for diabetes, visualized the change in the number of companies and the connections between companies in each industry, and analyzed the overview of the network. Second, we calculated the degree, betweenness centrality, and eigenvector centrality of each company in each year. Next, we analyzed the relationship between network centrality and market competitiveness by using annual sales as a parameter of company competitiveness. We also compared the network centrality of each company by industry or headquarters location (or both) and analyzed the characteristics of companies with higher centrality. Finally, we analyzed the relationship between network centrality and the number of products certified or approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. RESULTS: We found the degree centrality of companies was correlated with an increase in their sales. The betweenness and eigenvector centralities of medical devices companies located in the United States were significantly higher than those outside the United States (P=.04 and .005, respectively). Finally, the degree, betweenness, and eigenvector centralities were correlated with an increase in the number of Class III, but not of Class I nor II, medical device products. CONCLUSIONS: These findings give rise to new insights into industry ecosystem for digital health and its requirement and expect a contribution to research and development practices in the field of digital health.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.210 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR DiabetesSame topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207