MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612288471

Whole-System Patient Flow Modelling for Strategic Planning in Healthcare

2016· dissertation· en· W2612288471 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ali Vahit Esensoy

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careProcess managementBusinessComputer scienceOperations managementEngineeringPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health systems are under pressure to deliver high quality care to improve outcomes, access and financial sustainability. In the past decade, Ontario pursued such improvements through a series of transformation initiatives aimed at moving care provision to the community settings and integrating care around patient pathways through system. In this dissertation we present operational research (OR) approaches to facilitate whole-system strategic planning for health systems, with a focus on patient flow among care sectors to address transformation challenges in Ontarioâ s health care system and its regional health authorities. \nFirstly, we expand on Soft OR methods to collaboratively develop a qualitative model to capture the boundary and transitional view of patient flows across major care sectors in a health region. The model is not scoped around a specific question, but is meant to be a broad platform for exploring the patient flow relationships among multiple care domains. \nSecondly, we build on the findings of the qualitative model, and leverage the administrative datasets across these major care sectors to develop a high fidelity simulation model to evaluate the effects of policy interventions and their effects on system-wide patient flows. Methodologically this simulation builds on the structural simplicity of system dynamics with comprehensive, patient-level data to achieve a highly flexible simulation to model flows for a broad and modifiable range of patient cohorts and interventions. \nFinally, we implement both models in the analysis of whole-system care policies. The qualitative model is used for the analysis of slow stream rehabilitation policy options and is utilized to identify conflicts of this initiative with existing patient flow interventions. The simulation model is used to assess the cross-sector patient flow impacts of implementing stroke best practices. The results highlight the importance of community care investments and cross-sector referral patterns in realizing the greatest benefits from this policy.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationFrench-language works237,207