Automating data collection methods in electronic health record systems: a Social Determinant of Health (SDOH) viewpoint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social Determinant of Health (SDOH) data are important targets for research and innovation in Health Information Systems (HIS). The ways we envision SDOH in "smart" information systems will play a considerable role in shaping future population health landscapes. Current methods for data collection can capture wide ranges of SDOH factors, in standardised and non-standardised formats, from both primary and secondary sources. Advances in automating data linkage and text classification show particular promise for enhancing SDOH in HIS. One challenge is that social communication processes embedded in data collection are directly related to the inequalities that HIS attempt to measure and redress. To advance equity, it is imperative thatcare-providers, researchers, technicians, and administrators attend to power dynamics in HIS standards and practices. We recommend: 1. Investing in interdisciplinary and intersectoral knowledge generation and translation. 2. Developing novel methods for data discovery, linkage and analysis through participatory research. 3. Channelling information into upstream evidence-informed policy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.401 | 0.538 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".