POC Sensor Systems and Artificial Intelligence—Where We Are Now and Where We Are Going?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integration of machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) into point-of-care (POC) sensor systems represents a transformative advancement in healthcare. This integration enables sophisticated data analysis and real-time decision-making in emergency and intensive care settings. AI and ML algorithms can process complex biomedical data, improve diagnostic accuracy, and enable early disease detection for better patient outcomes. Predictive analytics in POC devices supports proactive healthcare by analyzing data to forecast health issues and facilitating early intervention and personalized treatment. This review covers the key areas of ML and AI integration in POC devices, including data analysis, pattern recognition, real-time decision support, predictive analytics, personalization, automation, and workflow optimization. Examples of current POC devices that use ML and AI include AI-powered blood glucose monitors, portable imaging devices, wearable cardiac monitors, AI-enhanced infectious disease detection, and smart wound care sensors are also discussed. The review further explores new directions for POC sensors and ML integration, including mental health monitoring, nutritional monitoring, metabolic health tracking, and decentralized clinical trials (DCTs). We also examined the impact of integrating ML and AI into POC devices on healthcare accessibility, efficiency, and patient outcomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".