Lean management approach in health sector: MCDM model proposal to prevention of waste
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lean manufacturing in the manufacturing sector corresponds to lean management in the service sector. When health services are considered, it is seen that the concepts that are important in the manufacturing sector have the same importance for health services. Because waste is the main problem of every sector. Lean management approach in the health sector enables improvements by developing solutions to many other problems of healthcare professionals, patients and hospitals, such as reducing transaction costs, ensuring patient safety, and reducing processing times. This study was carried out with the aim of establishing a lean health system by selecting the most appropriate lean management methodology in order to identify and prevent waste in health processes and to increase efficiency and service quality. In the study, the evaluation of lean methodologies that can be applied to prevent waste in health services is considered as a multi-criteria decision-making problem and a model has been proposed. In the proposed model, wastes were determined as research criteria and lean methodologies were determined as research alternatives. The solution phase of the problem was carried out in two stages with multi-criteria decision-making techniques. In the solution phase, the importance weights of 24 decision criteria were calculated with the SWARA method, while 5 alternatives were evaluated based on the decision criteria with the WASPAS method and the most suitable alternative was selected.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".