MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1410650954 · doi:10.1177/1359105315603464

Waiting for scheduled surgery: A complex patient experience

2015· article· en· W1410650954 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Psychology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsHealth CanadaAlberta HealthUniversity of SaskatchewanSt. Thomas University
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsCoping (psychology)MedicineQualitative researchPatient satisfactionMedical emergencyNursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to understand experiences of wait time among patients awaiting scheduled orthopaedic or cardiac surgery. Using a qualitative approach, 32 patients completed two interviews each regarding their wait time experiences, including effects of waiting. Patient experiences of wait time varied regardless of actual wait time and included reports of restriction, uncertainty, resignation, coping and opportunity. Participants' waiting experiences indicate a complex relationship between greater symptom severity and less tolerance for wait time. We suggest healthcare resources focus on alleviating the deleterious effects of waiting for certain patients rather than reducing absolute wait times.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.566
GPT teacher head0.596
Teacher spread0.030 · 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