MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013676876 · doi:10.1109/memb.2007.364931

Improving corrective maintenace efficiency in clinical engineering departments - Multiple Linear Regression and Clustering Techniques for Analyzing Quality and Effectiveness of Technical Services

2007· article· en· W2013676876 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Antonio Miguel Cruz, Cameron Barr, Elsa Pozo Punales

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicQuality and Safety in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsCluster analysisQuality (philosophy)Computer scienceRegression analysisLinear regressionClinical engineeringReliability engineeringRegressionMeasure (data warehouse)Data miningRisk analysis (engineering)Health careEngineeringStatisticsMachine learningMathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple linear regression and clustering techniques are tools that have been extensively applied in several financial, technical, and biomedical arenas, where vast quantities of data are produced and stored. These techniques show promise in analyzing the performance of departments responsible for and related to hospital equipment maintenance and, thereafter, identifying and improving areas of concern. As a contributory measure, this research is focused on the analysis of quality and effectiveness of corrective (nonscheduled) maintenance tasks in the healthcare environment and the improvement of those processes. The two main objectives of this research are to build a predictor for a TAT indicator to estimate its values and to use a numeric clustering technique to find possible causes of undesirable values of TAT.

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 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)0.010
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology MagazineSame topicQuality and Safety in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207