MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621060463

Predictive Analytics to Support Real-Time Management in Pathology Facilities.

2016· article· en· W2621060463 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lysanne Lessard, Wojtek Michalowski, Chen Li W, Daniel Amyot, D Banerjee

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Canadian institutionsCanadian Electricity AssociationMontfort HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnalyticsPredictive analyticsMedical diagnosisSurgical pathologyPathologyComputer scienceProcess (computing)Predictive valueMedicineData scienceInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predictive analytics can provide valuable support to the effective management of pathology facilities. The introduction of new tests and technologies in anatomical pathology will increase the volume of specimens to be processed, as well as the complexity of pathology processes. In order for predictive analytics to address managerial challenges associated with the volume and complexity increases, it is important to pinpoint the areas where pathology managers would most benefit from predictive capabilities. We illustrate common issues in managing pathology facilities with an analysis of the surgical specimen process at the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (DPLM) at The Ottawa Hospital, which processes all surgical specimens for the Eastern Ontario Regional Laboratory Association. We then show how predictive analytics could be used to support management. Our proposed approach can be generalized beyond the DPLM, contributing to a more effective management of pathology facilities and in turn to quicker clinical diagnoses.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlFrench-language works237,207