Systematic review of Internet of medical things for cardiovascular disease prevention among Australian first nations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic diseases within Indigenous communities constitute the most compelling ill-health burdens and treatment inequalities, particularly in rural and remote Australia. In response to these vital issues, a systematic literature review of the adoption of wearable, Artificial Intelligence-driven, electrocardiogram sensors, in a telehealth Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) context was conducted to scale up rural Indigenous health. To this end, four preselected scientific databases were chosen for data extraction to align with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) technique. From the initially collected ( n = 4436 ) articles, a total of 32 articles were analysed, being synthesised from the review inclusion criteria, maintaining strict eligibility and eliminating duplicates. None of the various studies found on this innovative healthcare intervention has given a comprehensive picture of how this could be an effective method of care dedicated to rural Indigenous communities with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Herein, we presented the unique concepts of IoMT-driven wearable biosensors tailored for rural indigenous cardiac patients, their clinical implications, and cardiovascular disease management within the telehealth domain. This work contributes to understanding the adoption of wearable IoMT sensor-driven telehealth model, highlighting the need for real-time data from First Nations patients in rural and remote areas for CVD prevention. Pertinent implications, research impacts, limitations and future research directions are endorsed, securing long-term Wearable IoMT sensor-driven telehealth sustainability.
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 | 0.011 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".