Investigating Open-access Booking in New Brunswick Occupational Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND.: Open-access booking (OAB) describes administrative changes to improve system efficiency. However, OAB studies have focused on GP practices and have not applied OAB to other health care services. PURPOSE.: The purpose of the study was to investigate the associations between OAB and administrative outcomes in the Saint John region. METHOD.: Evaluators compared three years of pre-OAB data against two years of post-OAB data using an interrupted-time series design (February 2014-January 2019). FINDINGS.: OAB was associated with a 12% jump in the likelihood of being discharged within three months even though clients received an equivalent level of service. OAB was not associated with more missed appointments (∼8% vs. ∼7%). While OAB was not associated with reduced wait times, the post-OAB period handled a larger number of client referrals, which may explain the null finding. IMPLICATIONS.: OAB shows potential for improving administrative outcomes, but further research is needed.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".