Analyzing Patterns of Service Utilization Using Graph Topology to Understand the Dynamic of the Engagement of Patients with Complex Problems with Health Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Providing care to persons with complex problems is inherently difficult due to several factors, including the impacts of proximal determinants of health, treatment response, the natural emergence of comorbidities, and service system capacity to provide timely required services. Providing visibility into the dynamics of patients’ engagement can help to optimize care for patients with complex problems. Method: In a previous work, graph machine learning and NLP methods were used to model the products of service system dynamics as atemporal entities, using a data model that collapsed patient encounter events across time. In this paper, the order of events is put back into the data model to provide topological depictions of the dynamics that are embodied in patients’ movement across a complex healthcare system. Result: The results show that directed graphs are well suited to the task of depicting the way that the diverse components of the system are functionally coupled—or remain disconnected—by patient journeys. Conclusion: By setting the resolution on the graph topology visualization, important characteristics can be highlighted, including highly prevalent repeating sequences of service events readily interpretable by clinical subject matter experts. Moreover, this methodology provides a first step in addressing the challenge of locating potential operational problems for patients with complex issues engaging with a complex healthcare service system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".