MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281631623 · doi:10.1055/s-0042-1742504

The Untapped Potential of Nursing and Allied Health Data for Improved Representation of Social Determinants of Health and Intersectionality in Artificial Intelligence Applications: A Rapid Review

2022· review· en· W4281631623 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueYearbook of Medical Informatics · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersectionalityDocumentationHealth equitySocial determinants of healthHealth careHealth informaticsPublic relationsData scienceSociologyPsychologyMedicineNursingPolitical scienceComputer sciencePublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this paper is to draw attention to the currently underused potential of clinical documentation by nursing and allied health professions to improve the representation of social determinants of health (SDoH) and intersectionality data in electronic health records (EHRs), towards the development of equitable artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. METHODS: A rapid review of the literature on the inclusion of nursing and allied health data and the nature of health equity information representation in the development and/or use of artificial intelligence approaches alongside expert perspectives from the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) Student and Emerging Professionals Working Group. RESULTS: Consideration of social determinants of health and intersectionality data are limited in both the medical AI and nursing and allied health AI literature. As a concept being newly discussed in the context of AI, the lack of discussion of intersectionality in the literature was unsurprising. However, the limited consideration of social determinants of health was surprising, given its relatively longstanding recognition and the importance of representation of the features of diverse populations as a key requirement for equitable AI. CONCLUSIONS: Leveraging the rich contextual data collected by nursing and allied health professions has the potential to improve the capture and representation of social determinants of health and intersectionality. This will require addressing issues related to valuing AI goals (e.g., diagnostics versus supporting care delivery) and improved EHR infrastructure to facilitate documentation of data beyond medicine. Leveraging nursing and allied health data to support equitable AI development represents a current open question for further exploration and research.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.326
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.208 · 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