An optimization model for equitable accessibility to magnetic resonance imaging technology in developing countries
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is a sophisticated and costly technology that provides highly accurate diagnoses of various medical conditions using a powerful magnetic field, radiofrequency pulses, and a computer to produce detailed pictures of internal body parts and organs. The dissemination of MRI use at medium and high-complexity healthcare facilities increases the cost of healthcare systems. It imposes accessibility challenges concerning the equitable availability of essential healthcare technology in developing countries. Despite the importance of this technology, very few studies approach this problem from multiple location–allocation perspectives. We propose an optimization model for equitable accessibility to MRI technology. We study this problem for the Brazilian National Health System at the municipality level, and recommend alternative locations, and acquire the new devices and technologies equitably throughout the country and health system. We show that while some municipalities have an oversupply, several regions in the country have no access to MRI technology. The models propose the number of new MRIs and their locations for needing municipalities considering equity principles. The results show, for instance, that the acquisition of 210 MRIs is enough to satisfy 95% of the demand for such service, with patients traveling 44 km on average in northern Brazil. We report accessibility gains from adopting the location–allocation plans developed using the optimization model proposed in this study.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it