MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Challenges of Hospital Incident Command System (HICS) from Experts’ Perspectives: A Qualitative Research

2017· article· en· W2742966275 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

VenueIndian Journal of Science and Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterviewProcess managementQualitative researchInefficiencyComputer scienceSoftware deploymentOperations managementKnowledge managementMedicineBusinessEngineeringPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Hospital Incident Command System (HICS) is one of the most valid incident command systems for preparing and increasing efficiency of hospitals. With regard to hospitals’ key roles in Medical Incident Management, the present study aims at obtaining experts’ ideas for investigating challenges of establishment of HICS in Iran’s hospitals. Methodology: The present study is qualitative one conducted via the semi-structured interviewing method. Interviews were conducted on 23 experts selected from HICS in the Medical University, Red Crescent Society and Social Security Organization in 2016 so that after recording each interview, they were transcribed and, then, the raw data were reduced and organized via the content analysis technique. Results: According to findings of the present study, since the HICS is established based on the principles that ensure the effective deployment of resources on one hand and decrease the disorder in policy making and the operations of responding organizations, on the other hand, the point of view of most participants in this study showed that the HICS in Iran is not implemented properly. The studies showed that consistency of this system with existing management structure in hospitals cause internal and external barriers to its implementation. Conclusion: Based on the present results, the most important cases causing inefficiency of HICS in Iran are as follows: complete lack of understanding of HICS’s components and features, lack of adequate training of the staff, and lack of localization HICS in Iran. Thus, appropriate planning, necessary intra-and inter-organizational coordination in incidents, reinforcement of forces by appropriately organizing them, supply of required training, suggestion of long-term strategies, and finally design of a HICS by applying components of the Quality Management System with regard to conditions in Iran seem necessary. Keywords: Challenges, Hospital Incident Command System (HICS), Qualitative Research, Semi-Structured Interview

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.349 · 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