MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047264740 · doi:10.1016/j.hcmf.2013.12.003

Performance Management Tools Motivate Change at the Frontlines

2014· article· en· W2047264740 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher Smith, Tanya Christiansen, Don Dick, Jane Squire Howden, Tracy Wasylak, Jason Werle

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesRockyview General HospitalAlberta Bone and Joint Health Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBalanced scorecardIncentiveQuality managementHealth careBusinessQuality (philosophy)Patient careOperations managementProcess managementPerformance measurementMedicineNursingMarketingEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Performance management tools commonly used in business, such as incentives and the balanced scorecard, can be effectively applied in the public healthcare sector to improve quality of care. The province of Alberta applied these tools with the Institute for Health Improvement Learning Collaborative method to accelerate adoption of a clinical care pathway for hip and knee replacements. The results showed measurable improvements in all quality dimensions, including shorter hospital stays and wait times, higher bed utilization, earlier patient ambulation, and better patient outcomes.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.437
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207