MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6909003411 · doi:10.34944/dspace/2359

The Impact of Star Physicians on Diffusion of a Medical Technology

2011· other· en· W6909003411 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTUScholarShare (Temple University) · 2011
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStar (game theory)Quarter (Canadian coin)Logistic regressionDiffusionPower (physics)Medical schoolLogit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation studies the effect of star power among physicians on the diffusion of a medical technology. Studies of the diffusion of medical technologies document institutional and market level factors influencing diffusion rates and patterns. The role of the physician in the diffusion of medical technology in hospitals is not widely studied. This dissertation seeks to fill this gap. Certain "star" physicians and hospitals are recognized as highly attractive to patients. A star physician is defined as a physician who meets any of the following criteria: (i) completed residency training at top 30 ranked hospital, (ii) graduated from a top 30 medical school or (iii) is included in Castle & Connolly's Top Docs publications. A star hospital is defined as a member of the American Association of Medical Colleges' Council of Teaching Hospitals. Using quarterly data on all bariatric surgeries performed in the state of Pennsylvania from 1995 through 2007, I measure the effect of stars physicians and star hospitals on the diffusion of a surgical innovation in bariatric surgery called laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery. I use logistic and OLS regression to test for effects at both the hospital and physician level. At the hospital level, I find that having a star physician at a hospital raises the likelihood of that hospital diffusing laparoscopic gastric bypass from eleven percent to eighty-nine percent. I find that over the time period from first quarter 2000 to fourth quarter 2001, being a star hospital raises the likelihood of that hospital diffusing laparoscopic gastric bypass from thirteen percent to eighty-seven percent. At the physician level, the empirical results indicate that star physicians exert positive asymmetric influence on the adoption and utilization rates of non-stars at the same hospital. This dissertation supports earlier work in technology diffusion by finding a positive influence from key individuals. It adds to the literature on medical technology diffusion by testing a new data set for a chronic disease treatment.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTUScholarShare (Temple University)French-language works237,207