MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388153184 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21586

Development and validation of the SickKids Enterprise-wide Data in Azure Repository (SEDAR)

2023· article· en· W4388153184 on OpenAlexafffund
Lin Guo, Maryann Calligan, Emily Vettese, Sadie Cook, George Gagnidze, Oscar Han, Jiro Inoue, Joshua Lemmon, Juqiang Li, Steven P. Wallace, Lillian Sung

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersGarron Family Cancer CentreMicrosoft
KeywordsComputer scienceSchema (genetic algorithms)Information retrievalDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To describe the processes developed by The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) to enable utilization of electronic health record (EHR) data by creating sequentially transformed schemas for use across multiple user types. Methods: We used Microsoft Azure as the cloud service provider and named this effort the SickKids Enterprise-wide Data in Azure Repository (SEDAR). Epic Clarity data from on-premises was copied to a virtual network in Microsoft Azure. Three sequential schemas were developed. The Filtered Schema added a filter to retain only SickKids and valid patients. The Curated Schema created a data structure that was easier to navigate and query. Each table contained a logical unit such as patients, hospital encounters or laboratory tests. Data validation of randomly sampled observations in the Curated Schema was performed. The SK-OMOP Schema was designed to facilitate research and machine learning. Two individuals mapped medical elements to standard Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) concepts. Results: A copy of Clarity data was transferred to Microsoft Azure and updated each night using log shipping. The Filtered Schema and Curated Schema were implemented as stored procedures and executed each night with incremental updates or full loads. Data validation required up to 16 iterations for each Curated Schema table. OMOP concept mapping achieved at least 80 % coverage for each SK-OMOP table. Conclusions: We described our experience in creating three sequential schemas to address different EHR data access requirements. Future work should consider replicating this approach at other institutions to determine whether approaches are generalizable.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207