Validation of a Design Architecture to Deliver Health Management and Behavior Change Evidence at Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forty-four percent of Canadians over the age of 20 have a non-communicable disease (NCD). Millions of Canadians are at risk of developing the complications of NCDs; millions have already experienced those complications. Fortunately, the evidence base for NCD prevention and behavior change is large and growing and digital technologies can deliver them at scale and with high fidelity. However, the current model of in-person primary care is not designed nor capable of operationalizing that evidence. New developments in artificial intelligence that can predict who will develop NCD or the complications of NCD are increasingly available, making the challenge of delivering disease prevention even more urgent. This paper presents findings from stakeholder engagement on a design architecture to address three initial barriers to large-scale deployment of health management and behavior change evidence: 1) the challenges of regulating mobile health apps, 2) the challenge of creating a value-based rationale for payers to invest in deploying mobile health apps at scale, and 3) the high cost of customer acquisition for delivering mobile health apps to those at risk.
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 | 0.129 | 0.157 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".