MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914811085 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2018.25697

Case Study – Gaining Physician Involvement in Quality Improvement Initiatives: An Organizational Perspective

2018· article· en· W2914811085 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lise Vaillancourt, Carolyne Mondoux

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsMontfort Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality managementPerspective (graphical)Best practiceQuality (philosophy)BusinessHealth administrationNursingMedicinePublic healthMarketingManagementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hôpital Montfort adopted the Lean methodology in 2008 to improve its services in the emergency department. Having achieved remarkable results, the hospital has gradually incorporated Lean initiatives at the corporate level. Physician involvement is key to the success of change efforts and achieving improved performance in public hospitals. Since it is a newly adapted methodology to healthcare, some physicians were skeptical of the changes this would make to their daily practice. This article provides an overview of Lean initiatives from the medical perspective. It addresses the importance of involving physicians and specific tactics for the same in these continuous improvement projects as well as its impact on their practice.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicHealthcare Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207