MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402391115 · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v9i5.2502

Development of a dictionary of information items inspired by common data models to support health research data access requests

2024· article· en· W4402391115 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carrie-Anne Whyte, Carmen La, Anis Ali, David D. Yang, Jean‐François Éthier, Mark McGilchrist

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Population Data Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeCanadian Institute for Health Information
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData accessData scienceData miningInformation retrievalDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A network of organizations collaborates to provide services to facilitate multi-regional research across Canada. To streamline the data access process, the network is developing a dictionary of information items (InfoItems), providing a label and definition that represent a semantic sourced from an ontology (e.g., “human birth date” from a demography ontology). This allows for a standardized and shareable means to express data requirements. Inspired by health-research common data models (CDMs) like those from the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) and the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effects (CNODES), approximately 60 InfoItems were developed by the network. As a pilot exercise, four data centres mapped their data assets to the InfoItems to ensure they are relevant to the Canadian health data context. This has laid the foundation for InfoItems as a basic data harmonization mechanism. The new InfoItems-based data dictionary promotes the standardization of data asset contents across the network’s data centres. Researchers can use the dictionary to specify a project’s data requirements, establishing details like data availability across multiple regions, for inclusion in their data access request. The InfoItems dictionary is pivotal in simplifying data access requests, promoting multi-regional research in Canada. This resource can simultaneously safeguard the quality of analytical results and optimize data extraction into existing data models (e.g., health-research CDMs). Ongoing improvements in this area aim to enhance user experience and facilitate quality research.

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 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)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication, Open science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.037
Open science0.0210.012
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 head0.823
GPT teacher head0.653
Teacher spread0.169 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Population Data ScienceSame topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207