MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104399119 · doi:10.1177/0897190009358772

The Use of Queueing and Simulative Analyses to Improve an Overwhelmed Pharmacy Call Center

2010· article· en· W2104399119 on OpenAlexaff
T. Eugene Day, W. Max Li, Ármann Ingólfsson, Nathan Ravi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy Practice · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingQueueing theoryPharmacyMedicineDiscrete event simulationDeskService (business)Call managementMedical emergencyComputer scienceOperations managementOperations researchComputer networkCall controlSimulationEngineeringNursingOperating systemBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Like many others, the St. Louis Veterans Administration Medical Center (VAMC) Pharmacy help desk receives far more calls than can be processed by current staffing levels. The objective of the study is to improve pharmaceutical services provided by the call center, by using queueing theory and discrete event dynamic simulation to analyze incoming telephone traffic to the help desk. Queueing and simulation models using both archival and hand-gathered data over a 1-year period were created, compared, and presented in order to determine the minimum quantities of staff needed to reach the desired service threshold. The simulation model was validated in comparison with real-world data. Results suggest that telephone traffic congestion in this setting may be alleviated by increasing the number of staff responsible for telephone services from 2 to 6 throughout the week, with an additional one serving on Monday. Both queueing and simulative models can be used to improve overwhelm pharmacy call centers, by determining the theoretical minimal staff needed to reach a service threshold.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.294
GPT teacher head0.589
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy PracticeSame topicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationFrench-language works237,207