Development of pediatric wait time access targets
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The effective management of wait times is a top priority for Canadians. Attention to date has largely focused on wait times for adult surgery. The purpose of this study was to develop surgical wait time access targets for children. METHODS: Using nominal group techniques, expert panels reached consensus on prioritization levels for 574 diagnoses in 10 surgical disciplines for wait 1 (W1; time from primary care visit to surgical consultation) and wait 2 (W2; time from decision to operate to receipt of surgery). RESULTS: A 7-stage priority classification reflects the permissible timeframe for children to receive consultation (W1) or surgery (W2). Access targets by priority were linked to 574 diagnoses in 10 pediatric surgical subspecialties. CONCLUSION: The pediatric surgical wait time access targets are a standardized, comprehensive and consensus-based model that can be systematically applied to children's hospitals across Canada. Future research and evaluation on outcomes from this model will evaluate improved access to pediatric surgical care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it