MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601832346 · doi:10.1287/opre.2016.1574

Managing Patient Admissions in a Neurology Ward

2017· article· en· W2601832346 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOperations Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurologyMedicineEmergency departmentPatient careMedical emergencyNursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study patient admission policies in a neurology ward where there are multiple types of patients with different medical characteristics. Patients receive specialized care inside the neurology ward and delays in admission to the ward will have negative impact on their health status. The level of this impact varies among patient types and depends on the severity of patients. Patients are also different in terms of arrival rate and length of stay at the ward. The patients normally wait in the emergency department until a ward bed is assigned to them. We formulate this problem as an infinite-horizon average cost dynamic program and propose an efficient approximation scheme to solve large-scale problem instances. The computational results from applying our model to a neurology ward show that dynamic policies generated by our approach can reduce the overall deterioration in patients’ health status compared to several alternative policies. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2016.1574 .

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.320
GPT teacher head0.590
Teacher spread0.270 · 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