MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226227475 · doi:10.34105/j.kmel.2021.13.021

Patient safety and health information technology conceptual framework

2021· article· en· W4226227475 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ernest Opoku-Agyemang, Dzifa Dordunoo, Ashley Ahmelich, Jett Carey, Αναστασία Μαλλίδου

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Management & E-Learning An International Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicQuality and Safety in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilityPatient safetySoftware deploymentHealth information technologyHealth careKnowledge managementConceptual frameworkBusinessInformation technologyEvent (particle physics)Conceptual modelMedical emergencyMedicineProcess managementComputer scienceWorld Wide WebDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health information technology (HIT) refers to the deployment of electronic systems health care professionals and patients use to store, share, and analyze health information to improve patient safety and outcomes. Some of the best practices to heighten HIT use include procuring and analyzing data, prioritizing interoperability, building dynamic content, accounting for evolving patient expectations, recognizing the human element, and respect for the patient as the health consumer. Providers should target patients with the appropriate HIT information that is tailored to their needs and circumstances. Thus, careful evaluation is required to ensure it meets the needs of the patients. In this paper, we describe the current state of electronic health records use in Canada along with a patient safety and technology conceptual framework. We use this framework and metal hypersensitivity, a medical device-related adverse event, to highlight how health information technology can be leveraged to create a learning health system and enhance patient safety.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.013
Scholarly communication0.0120.009
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge Management & E-Learning An International JournalSame topicQuality and Safety in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207