MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011694426 · doi:10.1109/icsssm.2006.320547

A Framework for the Modelling, Analysis and Optimization of Pathways in Healthcare

2006· article· en· W2011694426 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careComputer scienceProcess (computing)Business processData scienceProcess modelingProcess miningBusiness process modelingProcess managementManagement scienceKnowledge managementWork in processBusinessEngineeringMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Systems as complex as healthcare raise several challenges when applying a business process modelling approach within improvement projects. Although there is an abundance of process modelling frameworks, each with their own areas of emphasis, there is still room for a methodology which is specifically able capture all of the dimensions of interest particular to healthcare organizations. In this paper we introduce medBPM (medical Business Process Modelling), a new framework for healthcare process modelling, analysis and optimization that captures processes by documenting the underlying activities, movements, decisions points, events and queues, and also the unique pathways of patients, healthcare workers, material and information through these processes. This new framework has been tested and validated in various healthcare studies of which one study's results are presented

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBusiness Process Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207