MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238510104 · doi:10.15406/aowmc.2016.04.00090

Consumer Informatics and Health Information on Obesity

2016· article· en· W4238510104 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Margaret Czart

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Obesity Weight Management & Control · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's University
KeywordsHealth informaticsObesityInformaticsHealth informationBusinessMedicineHealth carePolitical scienceNursingPublic healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of internet by the consumer for health information on obesity, weight management and other obesity related diseases continues to soar.The need for information has formed a health informatics sub-specialty referred to as Consumer Health Informatics.Obesity is just one of many health conditions where consumer education for empowerment is important to improve their own health.In 2012, the percentage of obese adults 18 and older was 27.7 % in US nationally.Unfortunately, by 2014 the US percentage of obese adults increased to 28.9 %.The obesity trends in Canada are similar to those of the United States.In 2012, Statistics Canada has reported that 18.4% of Canadians aged 18 and older have been reported as being obese.The most recent Canadian statistics from 2014 has reported 20.2% of Canadians aged 18 and older as obese.In today's technological society there are additional new abilities and skills required for health literacy.Computer literacy skill is required to assess, understand, and apply health information obtained through the internet [5].Being able to assess the information as to its reliability and accuracy is critical vs. assessing the sophisticated design of any given webpage.In my opinion, in effort to assist consumers searching for health in regards to health literacy and computer literacy skills the US government should promote and place more awareness on health information websites.Therefore, my recommendation for consumers is to follow the following steps by visiting ".gov", ".edu".and ".org" sites first prior to searching the less reliable and accurate ".com" websites for health information online.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.006

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Obesity Weight Management & ControlSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207