HIPPP: Health Information Portal for Patients and Public
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer misinformation is becoming an increasingly complex issue. When a person or a loved one receives a diagnosis of possible cancer, that person, family and friends will try to better inform themselves in this area of healthcare. Like most people, they will turn to their clinician for guidance and the internet to better verse themselves on the topic. But can they trust the information provided online? Are there ways to provide a quick evaluation of such information in order to prevent low-quality information and potentially dangerous consequences of trusting it? In the context of the UL Cancer Research Network (ULCan), this interdisciplinary project aims to develop the Health Information Portal for Patients and Public (HIPPP), a web-based application co-designed with healthcare domain experts that helps to improve people navigate the health information space online. HIPPP will be used by patients and the general public to evaluate user-provided web-based health information (WBHI) sources with respect to the QUEST framework and return a quality score for the information sources. As a web application, HIPPP is developed with modern extreme model-driven development (XMDD) technologies in order to make it easily adaptable and evolvable. To facilitate the automated evaluation of WBHI, HIPPP embeds an artificial intelligence (AI) pipeline developed following model-driven engineering principles. Through co-design with health domain experts and following model-driven engineering principles, we have extended the Domain Integrated Modelling Environment (DIME) to include a graphical domain-specific language (GDSL) for developing websites for evaluating WBHI. This GDSL allows for greater participation from stakeholders in the development process of both the user-facing website and the AI-driven evaluation pipeline through encoding concepts familiar to those stakeholders within the modelling language. The time efficiency study conducted as part of this research found that the HIPPP evaluation pipeline evaluates a sample of WBHI with respect to the QUEST framework up to 98.79% faster when compared to the time taken by a human expert evaluator.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 0.021 |
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".