MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400522354 · doi:10.2196/54859

Integrating Health and Disability Data Into Academic Information Systems: Workflow Optimization Study

2024· article· en· W4400522354 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Accessibility for Disabilities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintWorkflowComputer scienceData sciencePsychologyWorld Wide WebDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Integrating health information into university information systems holds significant potential for enhancing student support and well-being. Despite the growing body of research highlighting issues faced by university students, including stress, depression, and disability, little has been done in the informatics field to incorporate health technologies at the institutional level. Objective: This study aims to investigate the current state of health information integration within university systems and provide design recommendations to address existing gaps and opportunities. Methods: We used a user-centered approach to conduct interviews and focus group sessions with stakeholders to gather comprehensive insights and requirements for the system. The methodology involved data collection, analysis, and the development of a suggested workflow. Results: The findings of this study revealed the shortcomings in the current process of handling health and disability data within university information systems. In our results, we discuss some requirements identified for integrating health-related information into student information systems, such as privacy and confidentiality, timely communication, task automation, and disability resources. We propose a workflow that separates the process into 2 distinct components: a health and disability system and measures of quality of life and wellness. The proposed workflow highlights the vital role of academic advisors in facilitating support and enhancing coordination among stakeholders. Conclusions: To streamline the workflow, it is vital to have effective coordination among stakeholders and redesign the university information system. However, implementing the new system will require significant capital and resources. We strongly emphasize the importance of increased standardization and regulation to support the information system requirements for health and disability. Through the adoption of standardized practices and regulations, we can ensure the smooth and effective implementation of the required support system.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.485
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.338 · 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