MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413441427 · doi:10.1007/s12597-025-00987-x

Quarantine-aware home healthcare routing and scheduling: a bi-objective approach

2025· article· en· W4413441427 on OpenAlexaff
Najmeh Nabavizadeh, Majid Rafiee, Vahid Kayvanfar, Nima Moradi

Bibliographic record

VenueOPSEARCH · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Network Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersQatar National LibraryHamad Bin Khalifa University
KeywordsHealth careQuarantineComputer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)Scheduling (production processes)BusinessMedicineOperations managementComputer networkEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has presented an unparalleled challenge to the healthcare sector, emphasizing the vital role of Home Healthcare (HHC) services in delivering essential medical care to patients and the elderly within their homes. This approach has proven to be the most effective means of adhering to quarantine protocols. In response, healthcare managers/decision-makers face the imperative of cost reduction, service quality enhancement, and the assessment of patient and nurse satisfaction. To address these pressing needs, our research introduces a Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) model tailored to the COVID-19 era. The model's central objective is to augment the operational efficiency and patient satisfaction of HHC organizations while ensuring strict adherence to quarantine regulations. It builds upon the foundational Vehicle Routing Problem with Pickup/Delivery and Time Window formulation, encompassing critical aspects like patient and caregiver classification, work regulations, workload balancing, and multi-depot capabilities. The bi-objective model considers the primary constraints associated with quarantine conditions. For model resolution, we employ the augmented ɛ-constraint (AUGMECON) method and conduct several sensitivity analyses related to workload balancing's impact on other decision variables. To illustrate the problem’s complexity and assess the effectiveness of the proposed MILP model across various scenarios, 15 additional sample instances have been solved and documented in the Appendix. In conclusion, our research not only provides essential managerial insights but also highlights avenues for future research within this crucial domain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOPSEARCHSame topicAdvanced Wireless Network OptimizationFrench-language works237,207