MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405803587 · doi:10.2196/66094

Applications of Natural Language Processing and Large Language Models for Social Determinants of Health: Protocol for a Systematic Review

2024· review· en· W4405803587 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Swati Rajwal, Ziyuan Zhang, Yankai Chen, Hannah Rogers, Abeed Sarker, Yunyu Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthAmerican Foundation for Suicide Prevention
KeywordsPreprintComputer scienceProtocol (science)Natural language processingData scienceArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebMedicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In recent years, the intersection of natural language processing (NLP) and public health has opened innovative pathways for investigating social determinants of health (SDOH) in textual datasets. Despite the promise of NLP in the SDOH domain, the literature is dispersed across various disciplines, and there is a need to consolidate existing knowledge, identify knowledge gaps in the literature, and inform future research directions in this emerging field. OBJECTIVE: This research protocol describes a systematic review to identify and highlight NLP techniques, including large language models, used for SDOH-related studies. METHODS: A search strategy will be executed across PubMed, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, PsycINFO, HealthSource: Academic Nursing, and ACL Anthology to find studies published in English between 2014 and 2024. Three reviewers (SR, ZZ, and YC) will independently screen the studies to avoid voting bias, and two (AS and YX) additional reviewers will resolve any conflicts during the screening process. We will further screen studies that cited the included studies (forward search). Following the title abstract and full-text screening, the characteristics and main findings of the included studies and resources will be tabulated, visualized, and summarized. RESULTS: The search strategy was formulated and run across the 7 databases in August 2024. We expect the results to be submitted for peer review publication in early 2025. As of December 2024, the title and abstract screening was underway. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive study of existing research on the application of NLP for various SDOH tasks across multiple textual datasets. By rigorously evaluating the methodologies, tools, and outcomes of eligible studies, the review will identify gaps in current knowledge and suggest directions for future research in the form of specific research questions. The findings will be instrumental in developing more effective NLP models for SDOH, ultimately contributing to improved health outcomes and a better understanding of social determinants in diverse populations. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/66094.

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)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.133
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.133
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.016
Bibliometrics0.0150.013
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0600.010

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 head0.679
GPT teacher head0.743
Teacher spread0.064 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations→French-language works237,207→