Characteristics of patients who leave without being seen: comparing with those who do not leave
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The percent of patients leaving without been seen by a doctor (LWBS) is often seen as a quality indicator of care. In this longitudinal study, we compare the behaviour over time of two groups of patients: the LWBS group composed by patients who did at least one LWBS visit, with the no-LWBS group containing the remaining individuals. We analysed their low acuity visits over a period of 3.5 years and search for the most frequent sequences of use of the Emergency departments in the city of Sherbrooke, Quebec. The LWBS visits represent a high percent of low acuity visits (14%) but they are generated by a low percent of the population (10.7%). The LWBS group generated 6.68 visits per person versus 3.13 visits in the no-LWBS group. The LWBS patients are young, 36 years old on average, and live in city areas either materially or socially deprived. Analysis of temporal sequences for all users revealed that patients’ conditions are being treated in the ED, instead of being followed up with a GP or a family doctor. Temporal sequences also revealed that a member of the LWBS group will likely repeat an LWBS visit within a week. Mental disorders, respiratory and digestive system problems are more frequent in the LWBS group than in the no-LWBS group and this may indicate chronic situations poorly managed. As there is no monetary incentive for the hospitals in Quebec to reduce the LWBS rate, we propose to establish a recall system that will direct chronic patients to external clinics already in service in the hospitals.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it