MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066170924 · doi:10.1016/s0840-4704(10)60411-5

Prioritizing Resource Allocation for Clinical Enhancement: <i>A Participative Methodology</i>

2001· article· en· W2066170924 on OpenAlexaff
Kristine Jarvi

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsYork Central Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrioritizationTask (project management)Resource allocationPlan (archaeology)Process (computing)Process managementOrder (exchange)Operations managementStrategic planningResource (disambiguation)BusinessComputer scienceKnowledge managementManagementMarketingGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The allocation of hospital funding for new and expanded clinical programs can be a difficult but most important task to deal with during the development of the operating plan (budget). Like many other hospitals, York Central Hospital has struggled with this task each year. In order to address this challenge, the hospital has successfully designed and implemented a prioritization process that includes a standardized program proposal and peer evaluation. The process is grounded in the hospital's vision and strategic directions and built on a culture of evidence-based practice.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
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 head0.397
GPT teacher head0.566
Teacher spread0.169 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationFrench-language works237,207