MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620381056 · doi:10.1108/bpmj-02-2017-0040

Translating improvement methodology into healthcare culture

2017· article· en· W2620381056 on OpenAlexaff
James Simon, Mishaela Houle

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness Process Management Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicQuality and Safety in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindsetToyota Production SystemOrganizational cultureHealth careStandardizationProcess managementStrategic planningOriginalityVisibilityKnowledge managementStrategic managementSix SigmaProcess (computing)Set (abstract data type)Operations managementComputer scienceBusinessMarketingPsychologyEngineeringPublic relationsLean manufacturingArtificial intelligencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss improvement of the business of health care delivery through the application of systematic problem solving. This was strengthened by recurrence prevention through standardization at every level transforming into culture. Design/methodology/approach The methodology utilized is set derived from the true fiber and fabric of Toyota, the Toyota Business Practice (TBP) or eight-step problem solving and its translation into health care thinking by aligning to the process of clinical diagnosis of patients. The methodology that gives energy and direction to TBP is Hoshin Kanri, a Japanese approach to strategic planning. When you combine focus and purpose through strategic direction alongside a culture of systematic problem solving you get results. Findings The application of the Toyota mindset resulted in a cultural shift which built on the strength of the current organizational culture. This approach had a broad impact on the program impacting leadership and management roles, improved employee engagement, complete visibility of organizational priorities, improved system performance, visibility and awareness of the vision and defined measures that drive the health care system. This has also resulted in cost diversions of approximately five million dollars CDN. Originality/value A grass roots application of real-time problem solving through strategic alignment.

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)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.014
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.252
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness Process Management JournalSame topicQuality and Safety in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207