MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320949517 · doi:10.1309/ajcpv8a9mrwhgxef

Measurement of Improvement Achieved by Participation in International Laboratory Accreditation in Sub-Saharan Africa

2014· article· en· W2320949517 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Edwin Kibet, Zahir Moloo, Peter Ojwang, Shahin Sayed, Ann Mbuthia, Rodney D. Adam

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Pathology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationQuarter (Canadian coin)Six SigmaQuality managementMedicineFamily medicineMedical educationPolitical scienceOperations managementGeographyEngineeringManagement system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: As part of the ISO 15189:2007 accreditation process, the Aga Khan University Hospital Nairobi laboratory became the first internationally accredited hospital laboratory in sub-Saharan Africa outside South Africa in 2011 through the South Africa National Accreditation System. METHODS: Seven preanalytic, 10 analytic, eight postanalytic, and five administrative performance parameters were monitored from 2009 to 2012 to measure the impact of the accreditation process. RESULTS: Most measures in all four categories showed substantial improvement. The seven preanalytic measures all showed major improvement-between a quarter and a half sigma. Real but less dramatic improvement appeared in analytic and postanalytic measures, but greater than one sigma decrease in analytic "procedure violations" and a three-quarter sigma decrease in excessive turnaround time were noted in these categories. Administrative improvements included dramatic decreases in misdirected and missing reports and complaints. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the correlation of the accreditation process with improvement in quality measures in a low-resource region.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical PathologySame topicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlFrench-language works237,207