MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A novel self-adaptive method for improving patient monitoring with composite early-warning scores

2022· article· en· W4320024117 on OpenAlexaff
Antonio Iyda Paganelli, Pedro Elkind Velmovitsky, Adriano Branco, Markus Endler, Plinio Pelegrini Morita, Paulo Alencar, Donald Cowan

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWearable computerRemote patient monitoringReal-time computingPruningWearable technologyTransmission (telecommunications)Adaptive samplingMachine learningArtificial intelligenceData miningEmbedded systemMedicineTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wearable sensors utilize small, low-cost, noninvasive, and wireless components. These sensors capture vital signs, allowing the monitoring of patients remotely. In this manner, they are efficient tools to enhance patient care and can be used to monitor vulnerable populations, and keep track of the development of chronic diseases, and the transmission of infectious illnesses – such as during pandemics. However, there are many challenges to monitoring patients using wearables, with massive data generation and battery power consumption being significant constraints. Strategies to reduce data generation should be applied taking into account the patient’s clinical status and health risks. Previous studies took advantage of single early-warning scores (EWS) utilized in infirmaries to detect emergencies, reduce transmissions, and be a reference for self-adaptive features embedded in the devices. Our work proposes the use of composite EWS to infer health deterioration risk, minimize data transmissions and power consumption, and reduce excessive alarms through self-adaptive features based on these scores. We also compare our method with previous studies using real patient data. Further, we propose applying self-adaptive features to sampling, processing, and transmission rates. Our method demonstrated enhanced data reduction, 81% fewer readings than the baseline, significant pruning of the number of alarms, and dynamic and automatic inference of patient risk.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.331
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.064 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data)Same topicHealthcare Technology and Patient MonitoringFrench-language works237,207