The Impact of Variability and Patient Information on Health Care System Performance
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the delivery of health care services, variability in the patient arrival and service processes can cause excessive patient waiting times and poor utilization of facility resources. Based on data collected at a large primary care facility, this paper investigates how several sources of variability affect facility performance. These sources include ancillary tasks performed by the physician, patient punctuality, unscheduled visits to the facility's laboratory or X‐ray services, momentary interruptions of a patient's examination, and examination time variation by patient class. Our results indicate that unscheduled visits to the facility's laboratory or X‐ray services have the largest impact on a physician's idle time. The average patient wait is most affected by how the physician prioritizes completing ancillary tasks, such as telephone calls, relative to examining patients. We also investigate the improvement in system performance offered by using increasing levels of patient information when creating the appointment schedule. We find that the use of policies that sequence patients based on their classification improves system performance by up to 25.5%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it