Navigating Infection Control Processes in a COVID-19 Only Safety-Net Hospital at the Height of the Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hospitals faced extraordinary challenges during the pandemic. Some of these were directly related to patient care-expanding capacities, adjusting services, and using new knowledge to save lives in a dynamically changing situation. Other challenges were regulatory. The COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted routine hospital infection control practices. We report the results of an interview study with 13 individuals associated with infection control in a small independent hospital. We employed the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model as a theoretical framework and as a basis to analyze data. The findings revealed how routine practices and protocols were displaced in notable ways. Due to COVID-19, clinical activities were modified, and the increased demands of regulatory reporting became laborious, and punitive if reports were late. Strategies are needed to mitigate increases in healthcare-associated infections. Our examination of the information flows, transformation, and needs shows areas in which digital tool creation and the use of a trained informatics workforce could ameliorate and automate many processes.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".