Search Results (1 to 10 of 48 Results)
Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS
Skip search results from other journals and go to results- 11 JMIR Research Protocols
- 8 JMIR Formative Research
- 7 Journal of Medical Internet Research
- 6 JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
- 5 JMIR Medical Informatics
- 2 Interactive Journal of Medical Research
- 2 JMIR mHealth and uHealth
- 1 Iproceedings
- 1 JMIR Cardio
- 1 JMIR Human Factors
- 1 JMIR Medical Education
- 1 JMIR Mental Health
- 1 JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting
- 1 JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies
- 0 Medicine 2.0
- 0 iProceedings
- 0 JMIR Serious Games
- 0 JMIR Preprints
- 0 JMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology
- 0 JMIR Cancer
- 0 JMIR Challenges
- 0 JMIR Diabetes
- 0 JMIR Biomedical Engineering
- 0 JMIR Data
- 0 Journal of Participatory Medicine
- 0 JMIR Dermatology
- 0 JMIR Aging
- 0 JMIR Perioperative Medicine
- 0 JMIR Nursing
- 0 JMIRx Med
- 0 JMIRx Bio
- 0 JMIR Infodemiology
- 0 Transfer Hub (manuscript eXchange)
- 0 JMIR AI
- 0 JMIR Neurotechnology
- 0 Asian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal
- 0 Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
- 0 JMIR XR and Spatial Computing (JMXR)
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Validation of Sleep Measurements of an Actigraphy Watch: Instrument Validation Study
JMIR Form Res 2025;9:e63529
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Two expert physicians, T Shiraishi and T Suzuki, independently evaluated the differentials. We adopted a binary approach to evaluate whether the final diagnosis was included in the differential diagnosis lists. When the lists included the final diagnosis, their rankings were also evaluated. To ensure consistency and objectivity in evaluations, any discrepancies between the initial assessments by T Shiraishi and T Suzuki were resolved through a consensus meeting involving a third expert physician, KT.
JMIR Form Res 2024;8:e64844
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
A total of 2 expert researchers (TI and T Suzuki) independently evaluated the differential diagnosis lists from GAI systems. A score of “1” was assigned if the differential accurately and specifically identified the final diagnosis or was sufficiently close to the final diagnosis. Conversely, a score of “0” was assigned if it diverged significantly from the final diagnosis [25]. When a GAI system could not output the differential diagnosis list, a score of “0” was labeled.
JMIR Med Inform 2024;12:e63010
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section