MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248000657 · doi:10.22374/cjgim.v7i4.129

Patient Profiling

2012· article· en· W4248000657 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kirsten Jewell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of General Internal Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProfiling (computer programming)Intensive care medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In medicine, we use profiling every day to help us make clinical decisions. What is the first thing we are taught to write on every admission note, progress report, and discharge summary? The Patient Profile, or Identifying Information. “Ms. Jewell is a 24-year-old female.” But, in an attempt to be thorough, other information is also often included here: “Ms. Jewell is a 24-year-old, white, intravenous drug user (IVDU) female living in a shelter.” Suddenly, with just a few added words, we have a lot more information from which to frame our initial assessment of the patient’s presenting history. We have also placed this patient into a box, one that may carry significant stigma and may negatively affect the patient’s care. Would you approach a patient with the same history differently if the profile read, “Ms. Jewell is a 24-year-old female, Caucasian medical student presenting from home with her boyfriend”?

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.301 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of General Internal MedicineSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207