MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944826834 · doi:10.5430/jha.v8n3p30

Patient work load and doctor hours in a Norwegian university hospital department

2019· article· en· W2944826834 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dag Bratlid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hospital Administration · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHospital Admissions and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEveningMedicineStaffingNorwegianEmergency departmentNames of the days of the weekEmergency medicinePediatricsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Although clinical hospital departments are 24/7 operations, doctor staffing is mainly concentrated during day-time on weekdays, while the rest of the week is covered by on-call systems to secure a minimum of patient care throughout the week. Few studies have investigated how this affects the relation between units of service (UOS) and available doctor hours.Methods: The study was carried out in a paediatric department with a neonatal intensive care section at a university hospital. Sixty per cent of the admissions were emergency cases. The organization of the 24/7 operation of the department is considered to be representative for most university hospital departments in Norway. OUS were calculated from the average number of in-hospital patients, out-patient consultations, the number of admissions and discharges during three defined time-periods: daytime, evening and night, assuming that all these doctor-patient contacts had the same impact on time use. Gross and net doctor hours on day-time during weekdays, on evenings, nights and weekends were calculated from work schedules, corrected for approved absence and long time sick leave. UOS per hour was calculated as the ratio between UOS and available gross and net doctor hours.Results: Both available doctor hours as well as UOS per hour varied considerably throughout the week. Eighty-three per cent of doctor hours were concentrated on day-time during weekdays, representing only 24% of week hours. Evenings and nights representing 76% of weekly hours, were covered with only 17% of doctor hours, and all nights through the week and weekend evenings, representing 55% of weekly hours, were covered with only 7% of total doctor hours available. Gross and net OUS per hour was increased six-fold and three-fold respectively at day-time on weekends compared to day-time during weekends. Evenings and nights had an even higher UOS per hour.Conclusion: The distribution of doctor hours through the week does not match UOS per hour. The high work load during weekends, evenings and nights are probably negative for the quality in patient treatment as well as for doctors work conditions. The department is probably understaffed during these time periods. It can also be asked if the department is overstaffed during day-time on weekdays. A more even and balanced staffing of hospital departments in relation to patient work load seems necessary in relation to quality in patient treatment, doctors' working conditions and productivity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hospital AdministrationSame topicHospital Admissions and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207