Application of Big Data to Support Evidence-Based Public Health Policy Decision-Making for Hearing

Ideally, public health policies are formulated from scientific data; however, policy-specific data are often unavailable. Big data can generate ecologically-valid, high-quality scientific evidence, and therefore has the potential to change how public health policies are formulated. Here, we discuss the use of big data for developing evidence-based hearing health policies, using data collected and analyzed with a research prototype of a data repository known as EVOTION (EVidence-based management of hearing impairments: public health pOlicy-making based on fusing big data analytics and simulaTION), to illustrate our points. Data in the repository consist of audiometric clinical data, prospective real-world data collected from hearing aids and an app, and responses to questionnaires collected for research purposes. To date, we have used the platform and a synthetic dataset to model the estimated risk of noise-induced hearing loss and have shown novel evidence of ways in which external factors influence hearing aid usage patterns. We contend that this research prototype data repository illustrates the value of using big data for policy-making by providing high-quality evidence that could be used to formulate and evaluate the impact of hearing health care policies

Modular System for Shelves and Coasts (MOSSCO v1.0) - a flexible and multi-component framework for coupled coastal ocean ecosystem modelling

Shelf and coastal sea processes extend from the atmosphere through the water column and into the sea bed. These processes are driven by physical, chemical, and biological interactions at local scales, and they are influenced by transport and cross strong spatial gradients. The linkages between domains and many different processes are not adequately described in current model systems. Their limited integration level in part reflects lacking modularity and flexibility; this shortcoming hinders the exchange of data and model components and has historically imposed supremacy of specific physical driver models. We here present the Modular System for Shelves and Coasts (MOSSCO, http://www.mossco.de), a novel domain and process coupling system tailored---but not limited--- to the coupling challenges of and applications in the coastal ocean. MOSSCO builds on the existing coupling technology Earth System Modeling Framework and on the Framework for Aquatic Biogeochemical Models, thereby creating a unique level of modularity in both domain and process coupling; the new framework adds rich metadata, flexible scheduling, configurations that allow several tens of models to be coupled, and tested setups for coastal coupled applications. That way, MOSSCO addresses the technology needs of a growing marine coastal Earth System community that encompasses very different disciplines, numerical tools, and research questions.Comment: 30 pages, 6 figures, submitted to Geoscientific Model Development Discussion

Evaluation campaigns and TRECVid

The TREC Video Retrieval Evaluation (TRECVid) is an international benchmarking activity to encourage research in video information retrieval by providing a large test collection, uniform scoring procedures, and a forum for organizations interested in comparing their results. TRECVid completed its fifth annual cycle at the end of 2005 and in 2006 TRECVid will involve almost 70 research organizations, universities and other consortia. Throughout its existence, TRECVid has benchmarked both interactive and automatic/manual searching for shots from within a video corpus, automatic detection of a variety of semantic and low-level video features, shot boundary detection and the detection of story boundaries in broadcast TV news. This paper will give an introduction to information retrieval (IR) evaluation from both a user and a system perspective, highlighting that system evaluation is by far the most prevalent type of evaluation carried out. We also include a summary of TRECVid as an example of a system evaluation benchmarking campaign and this allows us to discuss whether such campaigns are a good thing or a bad thing. There are arguments for and against these campaigns and we present some of them in the paper concluding that on balance they have had a very positive impact on research progress