MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cloud-Enabled Blood Bank Management for an Efficient Healthcare System

2024· article· en· W4402571491 on OpenAlexaff
Carmen Cornejo Huatuco, Chenyu Zhang, Janviben Patel, Md Moniruzzaman, Ajmery Sultana

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsAlgoma UniversityLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingHealth careComputer scienceBlood bankBusinessMedical emergencyMedicineOperating systemPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a very serious problem plaguing people right now, and that is the shortage of blood banks around the world. This is because blood is at the heart of a major healthcare challenge, blood plays a vital role as the body’s energy source. To address this issue, this paper describes a post-donation blood quality testing system, as well as a cross-matching testing system for blood type suitability for patients, that utilizes the advanced security features of Amazon Web Services (AWS), rigorously stores all user data, including personal information and blood type, and adds a commitment to protecting the integrity and confidentiality of blood donor data. AWS’s scalability ensures that the system can adapt to the growing demand for blood supply while maintaining performance and security, enhancing trust and transparency between donors, recipients, and healthcare providers. Blood is at the heart of a major healthcare challenge. Blood plays a vital role as the body’s energy source. Hence, we propose a web-based application system that is integrated in real-time with hospital databases in various regions, especially in remote areas, enabling rapid identification of blood needs and effective distribution, greatly reducing emergency response time. Also, the system will effectively help people living in remote areas. This system not only solves today’s blood supply management challenges but also sets a new standard for global healthcare equity and access in the future, ensuring that life-saving blood is available everywhere and to everyone who needs it.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.327 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207