MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200392498 · doi:10.1111/itor.13099

Performance evaluation of emergency department physicians using robust value‐based additive efficiency model

2021· article· en· W4200392498 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Transactions in Operational Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of OttawaÉlisabeth Bruyère Hospital
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaMinisterstwo Edukacji i NaukiNarodowe Centrum Nauki
KeywordsEmergency departmentComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)ComplaintMonte Carlo methodMedicineOperations researchMathematicsNursingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We propose a novel variant of the value‐based additive data envelopment analysis model. It conducts a comprehensive robustness analysis of efficiency outcomes for all feasible input and output weights using mathematical programming and the Monte Carlo simulation. We also introduce the original procedures for selecting a common vector of weights and an approach for investigating the stability of results in a multiscenario setting. The presented framework is applied to evaluate the performance of emergency department physicians using data from the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario in Ottawa. Our focus is on the physicians' performance when dealing with groups of patients' complaints related to abdominal pain and constipation, fever, extremity injury, head injury, and laceration/puncture. The obtained results emphasize the strong dependence of the physicians' performances on the selected weight vectors. However, they prove helpful in pointing out overall good performers who can serve as universal benchmarks or niche performers being markedly better in providing care to a given complaint group. They also offer a basis for developing an improvement plan for the underperforming physicians, identifying the priorities for a practice‐oriented model, and recognizing the most challenging patients' complaints.

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.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.388
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.134 · 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