MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367314599 · doi:10.1038/s41597-023-02104-3

Network Analysis of Academic Medical Center Websites in the United States

2023· article· en· W4367314599 on OpenAlexaff
Shuhan He, David Chen, Kameron Collin Black, P. Andrew Chong, Sammer Marzouk, Byung-Jun Yoon, Kendrick Davis, Jarone Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb visibility and informetrics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersOffice of ScienceU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsCentralityComputer scienceWorld Wide WebNetwork analysisData scienceIdentification (biology)Health careKey (lock)Web resourceResource (disambiguation)Information retrievalWeb pageComputer securityComputer networkPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

. However, these data repositories are created via manual surveying techniques which are cumbersome in collection and not updated as frequently as website information of the respective hospital systems represented. Also, this resource is not widely available to patients in an easy-to-use format. Network analysis techniques have the potential to create topological maps which serve to aid in pathfinding for patients in their search for healthcare services. This study explores the topological structure of forty United States academic health center websites. Network analysis is utilized to analyze and visualize 48,686 webpages. Several elements of network structure are examined including basic network properties, and centrality measures distributions. The Louvain community detection algorithm is used to examine the extent to which these techniques allow identification of healthcare resources within networks. The results indicate that websites with related healthcare services tend to form observable clusters useful in mapping key resources within a hospital system.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.037
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0070.002
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicWeb visibility and informetricsFrench-language works237,207