Exploring potential barriers in equitable access to pediatric diagnostic imaging using machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, we examine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) appointments at the Diagnostic Imaging (DI) department of a pediatric hospital to discover possible relationships between selected patient features and no-show or long waiting room time endpoints. The chosen features include age, sex, income, distance from the hospital, percentage of non-English speakers in a postal code, percentage of single caregivers in a postal code, appointment time slot (morning, afternoon, evening), and day of the week (Monday to Sunday). We trained univariate Logistic Regression (LR) models using the training sets and identified predictive (significant) features that remained significant in the test sets. We also implemented multivariate Random Forest (RF) models to predict the endpoints. We achieved Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC) of 0.82 and 0.73 for predicting no-show and long waiting room time endpoints, respectively. The univariate LR analysis on DI appointments uncovered the effect of the time of appointment during the day/week, and patients' demographics such as income and the number of caregivers on the no-shows and long waiting room time endpoints. For predicting no-show, we found age, time slot, and percentage of single caregiver to be the most critical contributors. Age, distance, and percentage of non-English speakers were the most important features for our long waiting room time prediction models. We found no sex discrimination among the scheduled pediatric DI appointments. Nonetheless, inequities based on patient features such as low income and language barrier did exist.
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 | 0.013 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".