MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W606195869

Improving Patient Flow with Lean Methodology: A Case Study at the Montreal General Hospital Colorectal Department

2013· dissertation· en· W606195869 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jonathan Rodriguez

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicOperations Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValue stream mappingLean manufacturingOperations managementColonoscopyHealth careMedicineMedical emergencyValue (mathematics)BusinessProcess managementEngineeringComputer sciencePolitical scienceColorectal cancer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quebec healthcare institutions are facing an increase in patients’ request and asked to do more with less, impacting the healthcare staff by working harder and longer shifts. Despite efforts, waiting lists keep growing in number resulting in patients waiting long periods of time for a specific treatment. Lean methodologies, originally developed in the manufacturing industry, offer an alternative to do more with less. Lean focuses efforts on eliminating activities that do not add value from the patient perspective and builds more efficient processes to perform an activity. This thesis proposes the use of Lean methodologies to improve the patient flow throughout the colorectal department at the Montreal General Hospital located in Montreal Quebec. A detail examination of the current processes of the department is analyzed and a proposed system is discussed with the use of value stream mapping and Lean principles. After rigorous data collection and analysis, initial improvements in the capacity of the department will increase in the common flow and colonoscopy loop by 20 patients per week and 60 patients per week respectively. In addition, Lead time will significantly decrease; up to 25% in short procedures, 20% in colonoscopies and 10% in surgeries.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicOperations Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207