Open-source Software for Demand Forecasting of Clinical Laboratory Test Volumes Using Time-series Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Demand forecasting is the area of predictive analytics devoted to predicting future volumes of services or consumables. Fair understanding and estimation of how demand will vary facilitates the optimal utilization of resources. In a medical laboratory, accurate forecasting of future demand, that is, test volumes, can increase efficiency and facilitate long-term laboratory planning. Importantly, in an era of utilization management initiatives, accurately predicted volumes compared to the realized test volumes can form a precise way to evaluate utilization management initiatives. Laboratory test volumes are often highly amenable to forecasting by time-series models; however, the statistical software needed to do this is generally either expensive or highly technical. METHOD: In this paper, we describe an open-source web-based software tool for time-series forecasting and explain how to use it as a demand forecasting tool in clinical laboratories to estimate test volumes. RESULTS: This tool has three different models, that is, Holt-Winters multiplicative, Holt-Winters additive, and simple linear regression. Moreover, these models are ranked and the best one is highlighted. CONCLUSION: This tool will allow anyone with historic test volume data to model future demand.
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 | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.012 |
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".