Predictive Data Analytics in Telecare and Telehealth: Systematic Scoping Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Telecare and telehealth are important care-at-home services used to support individuals to live more independently at home. Historically, these technologies have reactively responded to issues. However, there has been a recent drive to make better use of the data from these services to facilitate more proactive and predictive care. OBJECTIVE: This review seeks to explore the ways in which predictive data analytics techniques have been applied in telecare and telehealth in at-home settings. METHODS: The PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist was adhered to alongside Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework. English language papers published in MEDLINE, Embase, and Social Science Premium Collection between 2012 and 2022 were considered and results were screened against inclusion or exclusion criteria. RESULTS: In total, 86 papers were included in this review. The types of analytics featuring in this review can be categorized as anomaly detection (n=21), diagnosis (n=32), prediction (n=22), and activity recognition (n=11). The most common health conditions represented were Parkinson disease (n=12) and cardiovascular conditions (n=11). The main findings include: a lack of use of routinely collected data; a dominance of diagnostic tools; and barriers and opportunities that exist, such as including patient-reported outcomes, for future predictive analytics in telecare and telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: All papers in this review were small-scale pilots and, as such, future research should seek to apply these predictive techniques into larger trials. Additionally, further integration of routinely collected care data and patient-reported outcomes into predictive models in telecare and telehealth offer significant opportunities to improve the analytics being performed and should be explored further. Data sets used must be of suitable size and diversity, ensuring that models are generalizable to a wider population and can be appropriately trained, validated, and tested.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it