Phlebotomy Cycle Time Related to Phlebotomist Experience and/or Hospital Location
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little information is available regarding expected phlebotomy cycle time (total time needed to draw a blood specimen) in inpatient settings. Examining this variable in 4 hospitals in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, we determined the distribution of phlebotomy cycle times and compared this by hospital and by phlebotomist experience. METHODS: Between April 2014 and August 2014, we observed phlebotomy timing at 4 adult acute care hospital locations. Phlebotomists were stratified into 3 experience levels: 0 to 2 years, 2 to 5 years, and more than 5 years. We observed a total of 110 different phlebotomists. RESULTS: We observed no statistical difference between experience levels (P = .07) or hospital location (P = .44) on mean phlebotomy cycle time. CONCLUSIONS: The mean (SD) phlebotomy cycle time was 259 (52) seconds per patient for normal phlebotomy procedures. If expected minimum and maximum phlebotomy times are defined as mean +/- 2 SD, the expected cycle time range is 196 to 404 seconds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".