MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410776229 · doi:10.1186/s12911-025-03016-5

Monitoring patient pathways at a secondary healthcare services through process mining via Fuzzy Miner

2025· article· en· W4410776229 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
FundersTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma KurumuUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsHealth informaticsHealth careProcess miningProcess (computing)Fuzzy logicComputer scienceMedical emergencyMedicineData miningNursingPublic healthOperations managementEngineeringArtificial intelligenceOperating systemWork in process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This study explored workflow pathways followed by patients seeking secondary healthcare services at a local hospital in a rural part of Turkey using process mining to improve hospital resource management. METHODS: The study used process mining to discover process flows as patient pathways implied by hospital records for in-patient, out-patient, biochemical laboratory, and radiology services. Utilizing its flexibility, visualizations and robustness, authors implemented fuzzy-miner algorithm. First, we processed the relevant data from patient records. Then, this data was transformed into event and activity logs. Subsequently, all data components were collected into a data warehouse, and the process mining algorithm was applied. The process mining specified resource usage levels and workload, service waiting times, associated bottlenecks in hospital services, and related statistics/measures. RESULTS: The results from the proposed process mining analysis offer insights and decision support to improve hospital resource management. For example, the resulting statistics indicate the high waiting times (e.g., median of waiting times around 2 h within the selected time period) in the General Surgery and Cardiology services, whose resources were highly utilized (2,699 and 6,162 times). Overloads at laboratories and radiological imaging seem to be contributing to these long waiting times, and capacities for the associated services may need to be improved. Waiting times and resource workloads are higher on specific dates related to local commercial and social activities. CONCLUSIONS: Process mining successfully identified the real work flows, bottlenecks, and long waiting times at services within the considered local hospital and provided insights to the hospital management for improving their practices. Moreover, the analyses revealed unique challenges in providing care at a local hospital located far from the city center, emphasizing the potential of process mining to improve healthcare delivery tailored to the specific hospital environment. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.270 · 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