Anticipatory guidance and follow-up regarding online access to test results in the Canadian pediatric setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patient portals are online platforms that provide patients and/or their designated caregivers access to a subset of their personal health information (PHI) (1). In addition, they can facilitate patients’ ability to answer questionnaires, track medications, message their healthcare providers, self-schedule appointments, update their health information, and manage aspects of their care remotely. The use of patient portals is associated with improved patient sense of control, adherence, medical knowledge and improved perceptions of their medical team (2–7). Canada Health Infoway estimates that the majority of Canadians currently have access to some of their PHI in a patient portal (8). The use of patient portals is expanding and will likely play an increasingly important role in the way we care for children in Canada (9–11). In the current Canadian pediatric context, 5 out of 17 children’s hospitals in Canada offer a patient portal (12). In Canada, children receiving care and their caregivers may also have the opportunity to access a patient portal when using a private laboratory facility, when getting medical imaging, accessing care at a general hospital that provides care to both children and adults or through their primary care provider.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".