MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401555368 · doi:10.1177/08404704241271186

Innovation Pipeline: A framework for value-based decision making

2024· article· en· W4401555368 on OpenAlexafffund
Arianna Waye, Barbara Hughes, Kelly Mrklas, Nancy Fraser, Tracy Wasylak, Marc A. Leduc, Anderson Chuck

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCanadian Institute for Health InformationAlberta Health Services
FundersAlberta Health Services
KeywordsWorkflowPipeline (software)Value (mathematics)Knowledge managementHealth careComputer scienceResource allocationResource (disambiguation)Process managementManagement scienceRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of value-based healthcare and focus on health outcomes is not new. While these ideas have been shared for decades, health systems still struggle to implement value-based decision making. This article describes the Innovation Pipeline, a framework that embeds value-based decision making in a healthcare organization. The Innovation Pipeline outlines the measurable evidence requirements needed to demonstrate organizational definitions of value. This evidence of value allows health leaders to make decisions supported by rigorous data, evidence, and evaluation, ensuring initiatives that bring organizational value progress from good ideas that require testing to evidence-based services embedded and sustained in operational workflows. The Innovation Pipeline is rigorous and customizable to all levels of the health system and designed to streamline evidence-generation activities, focusing on collecting evidence needed to demonstrate value and inform funding and resource allocation decisions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.378
GPT teacher head0.654
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207