MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205225625 · doi:10.22215/etd/2021-14717

Improving the Efficiency and Capacity of Virtual Genetics Clinics using Human Factors Design Methods

2021· dissertation· en· W4205225625 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Attef

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowContext (archaeology)PandemicTask (project management)Qualitative researchPsychologyMedicineMedical educationNursingComputer scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseaseEngineeringSociologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic brought with it significant challenges for healthcare as well as some opportunities.The Prenatal Genetics Clinic at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) in Ottawa moved to virtual care at the outset of the pandemic.Herein, we conducted a quality improvement study focused on developing a better understanding of factors influencing the efficiency of prenatal Genetics Counsellors (GCs) to support virtual care and related patient activities, with the intent of developing strategies to improve workflow.Within the context of the pandemic, we used remote and field methods of quantitative and qualitative inquiry to develop a better understanding of clinical workflows after the implementation of virtual care.This included diary studies to track time on task and naturalistic observation sessions at the Clinic.The Lean Improvement Approach was used to assess barriers to efficient workflows and develop recommendations for improvement.The analysis of GC's virtual and on-site workflows has increased our understanding of the work GCs perform, allowed us to define the challenges with virtual care experienced by GCs, and evaluate the existing processes to help identify systemic design problems and opportunities for improvement.The strategies suggested from this analysis fall within real-world project constraints, which included the inability to increase the number of GCs and inability to renovate the current clinic space.Our results show that GCs spend at least half of their time on patient-related tasks before and/or after the patient's appointment.Therefore, looking at potential inefficiencies or bottlenecks during these phases of work may help improve their overall workflow and flow through of patients.The results and recommendations that emerged were captured in a framework that identifies 3 key areas for strategic improvement measures -digital accommodation, administration support, and clinical assistance.iii Recommendations from the administrative and clinical assistance groups have already been implemented in the form of a new scheduling strategy and a new support staff role for clinical assistance.The remaining recommendations will support the on-going development of a strategic plan for improving work efficiency across the entire patient service unit of the Department of Genetics.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207