MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293860136 · doi:10.2196/40243

Technologies for Interoperable Internet of Medical Things Platforms to Manage Medical Emergencies in Home and Prehospital Care: Protocol for a Scoping Review

2022· review· en· W4293860136 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mattias Seth, Hoor Jalo, Åsa Högstedt, Otto Medin, Ulrica Björner, Bengt Arne Sjöqvist, Stefan Candefjord

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilityScopusThe InternetProcess (computing)Protocol (science)PopulationGrey literatureSystematic reviewComputer scienceWorld Wide WebMedicineMEDLINEAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Population growth and aging have highlighted the need for more effective home and prehospital care. Interconnected medical devices and applications, which comprise an infrastructure referred to as the Internet of Medical Things (IoMT), have enabled remote patient monitoring and can be important tools to cope with these demographic changes. However, developing IoMT platforms requires profound knowledge of clinical needs and challenges related to interoperability and how these can be managed with suitable technologies. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this scoping review is to summarize the best practices and technologies to overcome interoperability concerns in IoMT platform development for medical emergencies in home and prehospital care. METHODS: This scoping review will be conducted in accordance with Arksey and O'Malley's 5-stage framework and adhere to the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Protocols) guidelines. Only peer-reviewed articles published in English will be considered. The databases/web search engines that will be used are IEEE Xplore, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, National Center for Biotechnology Information, SAGE Journals, and ScienceDirect. The search process for relevant literature will be divided into 4 different steps. This will ensure that a suitable approach is followed in terms of search terms, limitations, and eligibility criteria. Relevant articles that meet the inclusion criteria will be screened in 2 stages: abstract and title screening and full-text screening. To reduce selection bias, the screening process will be performed by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: The results of the preliminary search indicate that there is sufficient literature to form a good foundation for the scoping review. The search was performed in April 2022, and a total of 4579 articles were found. The main clinical focus is the prevention and management of falls, but other medical emergencies, such as heart disease and stroke, are also considered. Preliminary results show that little attention has been given to real-time IoMT platforms that can be deployed in real-world care settings. The final results are expected to be presented in a scoping review in 2023 and will be disseminated through scientific conference presentations, oral presentations, and publication in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review will provide insights and recommendations regarding how interoperable real-time IoMT platforms can be developed to handle medical emergencies in home and prehospital care. The findings of this research could be used by researchers, clinicians, and implementation teams to facilitate future development and interdisciplinary discussions. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/40243.

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)0.066
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0660.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.016
Bibliometrics0.0240.021
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0090.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.013

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 head0.495
GPT teacher head0.649
Teacher spread0.154 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicHealthcare Technology and Patient MonitoringFrench-language works237,207