MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994124665 · doi:10.3390/su11247028

A Systems Thinking Model to Support Long-Term Bearability of the Healthcare System: The Case of the Province of Quebec

2019· article· en· W2994124665 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ernesto A. Lagarda‐Leyva, Ángel Ruiz

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersInstituto Tecnológico de SonoraNational Science and Technology CouncilConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaUniversité Laval
KeywordsCasualCausal loop diagramTerm (time)System dynamicsChristian ministryProcess (computing)Process managementComputer scienceCausal modelManagement scienceKnowledge managementOperations researchEngineeringPolitical scienceMedicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the modeling efforts devoted by the Ministry of Health and Social Services of Québec, Canada (MSSS), to ensure the long-term bearability of their care system. To this end, it studies the relationships between four entities that self-regulate and interact to form the complex care-providing system: (1) universities; (2) hospitals and doctors; (3) the ministry; and (4) society. The first phase of this research focuses on modeling such relationships and relies on the system dynamics methodology to adequately capture the long-term dynamics of the system. The methodology encompasses three phases: (a) determination of the critical variables and parameters of each entity; (b) development of the causal diagram of each entity; and (c) integration of the individual causal diagrams to form the global system diagram. The final casual model illustrates and explains the relationships between all the entities and constitutes an excellent tool to support experts during discussions or focus groups where critical variables that positively or negatively affect the system can be evaluated. We intend to enrich this casual model in a further phase of the project, which will hopefully lead to a simulation and scenario analysis tool that can be used to support managers in their long-term decision-making process.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.316 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207