Enhancing Surgery Scheduling in Health Care Settings With Metaheuristic Optimization Models: Algorithm Validation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Health care is facing many challenges. The recent pandemic has caused a global reflection on how clinical and organizational processes should be organized, which requires the optimization of decision-making among managers and health care professionals to deliver care that is increasingly patient-centered. The efficiency of surgical scheduling is particularly critical, as it affects waiting list management and is susceptible to suboptimal decisions due to its complexity and constraints. Objective: In this study, in collaboration with one of the leading hospitals in Portugal, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Santo António (CHUdSA), a heuristic approach is proposed to optimize the management of the surgical center. Methods: CHUdSA's surgical scheduling process was analyzed over a specific period. By testing an optimization approach, the research team was able to prove the potential of artificial intelligence (AI)-based heuristic models in minimizing scheduling penalties-the financial costs incurred by procedures that were not scheduled on time. Results: The application of this approach demonstrated potential for significant improvements in scheduling efficiency. Notably, the implementation of the hill climbing (HC) and simulated annealing (SA) algorithms stood out in this implementation and minimized the scheduling penalty, scheduling 96.7% (415/429) and 84.4% (362/429) of surgeries, respectively. For the HC algorithm, the penalty score was 0 in the urology, obesity, and pediatric plastic surgery medical specialties. For the SA algorithm, the penalty score was 5100 in urology, 1240 in obesity, and 30 in pediatric plastic surgery. Together, this highlighted the ability of AI-heuristics to optimize the efficiency of this process and allowed for the scheduling of surgeries at closer dates compared to the manual method used by hospital professionals. Conclusions: Integrating these solutions into the surgical scheduling process increases efficiency and reduces costs. The practical implications are significant. By implementing these AI-driven strategies, hospitals can minimize patient wait times, maximize resource use, and enhance surgical outcomes through improved planning. This development highlights how AI algorithms can effectively adapt to changing health care environments, having a transformative impact.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".