IMPLEMENTING AN ISO 10001-BASED PROMISE IN INPATIENTS CARE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the implementation of a Customer Satisfaction Promise (CSP) that requires nurses to introduce themselves and explain the care plan to the patients of a hospital unit in Canada. The CSP implementation, maintenance and improvement activities were based on ISO 10001:2007. Qualitative and quantitative performance data were collected from nurses, the unit manager and patients, and improvement suggestions were made. During the implementation, nurses introduced themselves 95% of the time and explained the care plan 86% of the time. When interviewed, some nurses stated that the CSP was a good reinforcement of a practice already expected of them, which made patients happy, satisfied and more comfortable. Data from a small sample of patients was not adequate in clearly indicating the CSP's performance or improvement, but was useful in validating the survey and the feedback form. To our knowledge, applications of ISO 10001:2007 in health care have not been studied. Furthermore, this paper may be the first example of the integrated use of ISO 10001 and ISO 10002 in health care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".