MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006476008 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v4n2p50

Clinical Pathways as Instruments for Risk and Cost Management in Hospitals - A Discussion Paper

2012· article· en· W2006476008 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tobias Romeyke, Harald Stummer

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical pathwayQuality assuranceContext (archaeology)MedicineRisk managementHealth careQuality (philosophy)LiabilityProcess (computing)Risk analysis (engineering)Medical emergencyBusinessNursingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The distinctive characteristics of the German health system are medical progress and financial pressure-and this is especially true of the hospitals. These challenges must be met by strategic management instruments for quality assurance, and by reducing costs. PURPOSE: This article presents the instrument "clinical pathway" (also known as "clinical treatment pathway") and describes the possibilities it offers, both for quality assurance and risk management, and for cost reduction. The clinical pathway presented here will be that for "multimodal pain therapy", as used in the context of acute inpatient care in Germany. METHODS: A general presentation of the risks in hospital is followed by consideration of the risks associated with core processes. A comprehensive total cost analysis is performed for those patients who meet the pathway entry criteria and who fulfil the requirements for the structure of care provided within multimodal pain therapy. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Multimodal pain therapy places high demands on the structural, procedural and outcome quality of the medical, nursing and therapeutic services provided, and these demands are reflected in high costs for the provision of this care. The treatment process involves many different professional groups. These complex interfaces can potentially generate risks, which can lead to the possibility of legal liability. A clinical pathway must structure the core process and then combine elements of quality assurance in order to optimise patient care and minimise risk. The examination of costs reveals significant potential savings (patients with clinical pathway: EUR 3086±212; patients without clinical pathway: EUR 3774±460; Mann-Whitney U test; p<0.001). For the managers of a hospital, the clinical pathway represents a strategic management instrument that can serve for continual cost control and cost reduction, and can contribute in the form of quality assurance towards a transparent provision of services.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0140.012
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.540
Teacher spread0.377 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations31
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207