MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Strategic Analytics to Drive Provincial Dialysis Capacity Planning

2017· book-chapter· en· W2900544213 on OpenAlexaffabout
Neal Kaw, Somayeh Sadat, Ali Vahit Esensoy, Zhihui Liu, Sarah Jane Bastedo, Gihad Nesrallah

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in healthcare information systems and administration book series · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalOntario Stroke NetworkCancer Care OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialysisPeritoneal dialysisMedicineStrategic planningAnalyticsHemodialysisIntensive care medicineArteriovenous fistulaPopulationOperations managementBusinessComputer scienceEngineeringSurgeryData scienceEnvironmental healthMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter discusses applications of analytics at the strategic level of health system planning in the province of Ontario, Canada. To supplement the strategic priorities of the Ontario Renal Plan I, a roadmap developed by the Ontario Renal Network to guide its directions in coordinating renal care province-wide, an interactive user-friendly analytical capacity planning model was developed to forecast the growth of the prevalent chronic dialysis patient population and estimate consequent future need for hemodialysis stations at Ontario's dialysis facilities. The model also projects operational funding to care for dialysis patients, vascular surgeries to achieve arteriovenous fistula targets, peritoneal dialysis catheter insertions to achieve peritoneal dialysis prevalence targets, and incident dialysis patients to be sent home to achieve prevalent home dialysis targets. The model uses a variety of analytical methods, including time series analysis, mathematical optimization, geo-spatial analysis and Monte Carlo simulation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in healthcare information systems and administration book seriesSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207