MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033908819

Robust Multi-Class Multi-Period Scheduling of MRI Services with Wait Time Targets

2018· dissertation· en· W7033908819 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Robust optimizationInteger programmingScheduleSet (abstract data type)Job shop schedulingLinear programmingService (business)Deadline-monotonic schedulingRobustness (evolution)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, long wait times for healthcare services have become a challenge in most healthcare delivery systems in Canada. This issue becomes even more important when there are priorities in patients' treatment which means some of the patients need emergency treatment, while others can wait longer. One example of excessively long wait times in Canada is the MRI scans. These wait times are partially due to limited capacity and increased demand, but also due to sub-optimal scheduling policies. Patients are typically prioritized by the referring physician based on their health condition, and there is a wait time target for each priority level. The difficulty of scheduling increases due to uncertainty in patients' arrivals and service times. In this thesis, we develop a multi-priority robust optimization (RO) method to schedule patients for MRI services over a multi-period finite horizon. First, we present a deterministic mixed integer programming model which considers patient priorities, MRI capacity, and wait time targets for each priority level. We then investigate robust counterparts of the model by considering uncertainty in patients' arrivals and employing the notion of the budget of uncertainty. Finally, we apply the proposed robust model to a set of numerical examples and compare the results with those of the non-robust method. Moreover, sensitivity analysis is performed over capacity, penalty cost, service level, and budget of uncertainty. Our results demonstrate that the proposed robust approach provides solutions with higher service levels for each priority, and lower patients' wait time in realistic problem instances. The analysis also provides some insights on expanding capacity and choosing the budget of uncertainty as a trade-off between performance and conservatism.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationFrench-language works237,207