Evaluasi Prosedur Waktu Pengembalian Dokumen Rekam Medis Rawat Inap Di Rumah Sakit Umum X Surabaya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Management of medical record documents must be monitored, both the time of their provision and the timeliness of their return. The establishment of standard operating procedures (SOP) at General Hospital X Surabaya aims to maintain administrative order and improve service quality. This includes the return of medical record documents, which the standard is 2x24 hours after the patient is declared home. However, there are still discrepancies in the implementation of the time for returning inpatient medical record documents to the storage room. The purpose was to determine the suitability of the procedure for returning inpatient medical record documents in the fourth quarter of 2021. The method was qualitative, with a retrospective approach. The population and sample are inpatient medical record documents in the fourth quarter of 2021 as many as 2,995 medical record documents and 5 officers. Used purposive sampling technique, with observation sheets and interviews. The results found were that 57,3% (1692 documents) didn’t comply with the procedure for returning medical record documents, and 42,7% (1263 documents) complied. Conclusion, the time for returning inpatient medical record documents for the fourth quarter of 2021 hasn’t been in accordance with existing procedures, because many medical record document returns exceed the 2x24 hour limit. The reason is disorganized administration of officers and there isn’t continuous evaluation to improve system for returning medical record documents with regulations. Suggestions monitoring of staff performance, as well as optimizing the use of computers to make it easier to find medical record documents that haven’t been returned.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".