MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231903900 · doi:10.32370/ia_2019_01_si_7

Innovative Health Technologies Based on Big Data

2019· article· en· W4231903900 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntellectual Archive · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBig dataData scienceComputer scienceBusinessData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses the possibilities of using big data (Big Data) in innovative technologies in healthcare. We are talking about processing and storing large data which allow making diagnosis more accurately, checking medical data without burdening doctors, and integrating the results of studies performed on different devices into a common system. Big data analysis is also needed to optimize the staffing of healthcare institutions. The author also discusses various healthcare applications for smartphones and other mobile devices that also work on the basis of big data (CareAware Connect, MyChart, Healthtap). Of course, one of the biggest trends in business intelligence remains predictive analytics in healthcare. With examples of using big data in this industry, this article examined the main trends in improving the quality of treatment for patients, especially those suffering from chronic diseases, tracking the general health of the population and reducing the overall costs of medical institutions.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.013

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 head0.337
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.146 · 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