MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116258259 · doi:10.1002/jhrm.20048

A customizable plan for effective claims management

2010· article· en· W2116258259 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Irving, Adrienne Prager, Carolyn Standley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Healthcare Risk Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsPontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk managementBusinessKey (lock)Plan (archaeology)Risk management planProcess managementRisk analysis (engineering)Health careKnowledge managementIT risk managementComputer scienceComputer securityFinancePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Claims administration is central to healthcare risk management. This article examines several key aspects of claims management and provides useful information for both new and experienced claims professionals. It offers tools and examples for inexperienced risk managers to master effective claims management practices and outlines suggestions that seasoned risk managers can use to update or validate their own processes. These claims management practices serve to protect the organization's assets and can be customized to meet each organization's needs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Healthcare Risk ManagementSame topicHealthcare Policy and ManagementFrench-language works237,207