MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387901511 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckad160.1209

UbiSeCEF: Ubilab's Secure Cloud Environment Framework for Public Health Research

2023· article· en· W4387901511 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paula Miranda, Jasleen Kaur, Plinio Pelegrini Morita

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingPublic healthData sharingComputer scienceCorporate governanceComputer securityKnowledge managementBusinessPublic relationsPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Issue/Problem The adoption of cloud-based public health research over personal health data in an academic setting in Canada is still in its early stages and lacks the necessary maturity to handle such technologies. This can be attributed to the fact that many public health researchers lack the required IT knowledge to set up and use these environments securely and effectively. Description of Problem The lack of expertise among public health researchers in Canada has led to a slow adoption of cloud-based public health research. This has resulted in a significant gap between the potential benefits of cloud-based research and the current state of practice. To address this challenge, we propose Ubilab's Secure Cloud Environment Framework (UbiSeCEF) as guidelines for those interested in conducting similar public research. Results UbiSeCEF's components were developed with consideration given to requirements from stakeholders, Ubilab's operations and data objectives, state-of-the-art technologies, and laws and standards that regulate public health research and personal health data sharing. The framework utilizes Azure's data governance framework, virtual private networks (VPN), role-based authentication, and policy-based access to control access to resources and research data. The implementation of UbiSeCEF provides a secure, flexible, and efficient environment for cloud-based public health research. Lessons The lack of IT expertise among public health researchers can hinder the adoption of cloud-based public health research. To address this challenge, the development of frameworks like UbiSeCEF can provide guidance for secure and effective implementation. The use of state-of-the-art technologies and compliance with laws and standards that regulate public health research and personal health data sharing can greatly enhance the quality and reliability of research outcomes while ensuring the protection of personal health data. Key messages • Framework developed to enhance secure & effective adoption of cloud-based public health research by addressing lack of IT expertise among researchers. • The research aims to assist other researchers and institutions in navigating the complexities of cloud-based public health research while maintaining the privacy and security of public heath data.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0050.010
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.869
GPT teacher head0.632
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public HealthSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207