MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Non-Traditional Data Mining Applications in Taiwan National Health Insurance (NHI) Databases

2017· book-chapter· en· W4243029034 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Tan, Fuchung Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecision support systemRelevance (law)Data scienceData warehousePaymentComputer scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)Data miningKnowledge managementProcess (computing)Clinical decision support systemDatabaseWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines time-sensitive applications of data mining methods to facilitate claims review processing and provide policy information for insurance decision-making vis-à-vis the Taiwan National Health Insurance (NHI) databases. In order to obtain the best payment management, a hybrid mining (HM) approach, which has been grounded on the extant knowledge of data mining projects and health insurance domain knowledge, is proposed. Through the integration of data warehousing, online analytic processing, data mining techniques and traditional data analysis in the healthcare field, an easy-to-use decision support platform, which will assist in directing the health insurance decision-making process, is built. Drawing from lessons learned within a case study setting, results showed that not only is HM approach a reliable, powerful, and user-friendly platform for diversified payment decision support, but that it also has great relevance for the practice and acceptance of evidence-based medicine. Essentially, HM approach can provide a critical boost to health insurance decision support; hence, future researchers should develop and improve the approach combined with their own application systems.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicData Mining Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207