MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415569936 · doi:10.5267/j.he.2025.1.002

Measuring the relative efficiency of MRI/CT unit in Canada: Implications for healthcare policy

2025· article· W4415569936 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hasti Bagherzadi

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiology practices and education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData envelopment analysisEfficiencyUnit (ring theory)Measure (data warehouse)Health careEmpirical evidenceEmpirical research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the past few years, many patients must wait for a long period of time to receive MRI/CT medication. This paper presents an empirical method to measure the relative efficiency of MRI/CT medications using the popular method of data envelopment analysis. The proposed method of this paper uses two inputs; the number of employees and the number of MRI or CT devises used and considers the number of patients received medications as the output. The results indicate that Alberta was the most efficient province according to all four DEA techniques. However, the study did not find strong evidence to claim low efficiencies in nearly all provinces.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.298 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 venueHealthcare EngineeringSame topicRadiology practices and educationFrench-language works237,207