MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1980708428 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v7n5p272

Reengineering NHS Hospitals in Greece: Redistribution Leads to Rational Mergers

2015· article· en· W1980708428 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Athanasios Nikolentzos, Nick Kontodimopoulos, Nikolaos Polyzos, Eleftherios Thireos, Yannis Tountas

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness process reengineeringWorkforceRedistribution (election)Baseline (sea)BusinessConsolidation (business)Health careHealthcare systemPublic healthOperations managementNursingMedicineMarketingFinanceEconomicsEconomic growthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to record and evaluate existing public hospital infrastructure of the National Health System (NHS), in terms of clinics and laboratories, as well as the healthcare workforce in each of these units and in every health region in Greece, in an attempt to optimize the allocation of these resources. An extensive analysis of raw data according to supply and performance indicators was performed to serve as a solid and objective scientific baseline for the proposed reengineering of the Greek public hospitals. Suggestions for "reshuffling" clinics and diagnostic laboratories, and their personnel, were made by using a best versus worst outcome indicator approach at a regional and national level. This study is expected to contribute to the academic debate about the gap between theory and evidence based decision-making in health policy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.241
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health Science→Same topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→