MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360620759 · doi:10.33137/utmj.v100i1.40353

Principles of resource allocation and triage during COVID-19

2023· article· en· W4360620759 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Henry Ajzenberg, Simon Oczkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Medical Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriageScarcityPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Protocol (science)Resource allocationProcess (computing)Health careResource (disambiguation)Resource scarcityBusinessMedical emergencyMedicineComputer sciencePolitical scienceEconomicsNatural resource economicsLawDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic confronted Canadians with the fact that our health care systems may not always have enough to go around. Critical care resources, specifically, were stretched far beyond the limits of what was thought possible. In the spring of 2021, the exponential growth of patients with COVID-19 brought Ontario’s ICUs frighteningly near the breaking point. When a health system’s resources are overwhelmed by the demands placed upon them, allocation of scarce resources is typically performed by triage — a formalized system to determine who receives critical care resources and who does not. In this commentary, we will explain the rationale for the use of a formal triage protocol during times of resource scarcity; review the ethical foundations of an approach to resource allocation; outline the process of triage protocol development in Ontario during the COVID-19 pandemic, and highlight some lessons learned for the future.

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)0.131
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.095
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1310.095
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.072
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0150.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto Medical JournalSame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207