ArticleHealth care management science2024
Dissatisfaction-considered waiting time prediction for outpatients with interpretable machine learning.
Article in Health care management science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Access improvement in healthcare: a 12-step framework for operational practice.Frontiers in health services · 2024Pooled it
- Data-driven identification of outpatient-suitable procedures: a machine learning approach.Health care management science · 2026Article
- Identifying key influencers of patient satisfaction using an explainable machine learning approach.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The crucial role of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) in improving health care management.Health care management science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Long waiting time in outpatient departments is a crucial factor in patient dissatisfaction. We aim to analytically interpret the waiting times predicted by machine learning models and provide patients with an explanation of the expected waiting time. Here, underestimating waiting times can cause patient dissatisfaction, so preventing this in predictive models is necessary. To address this issue, we propose a framework considering dissatisfaction for estimating the waiting time in an outpatient department. In our framework, we leverage asymmetric loss functions to ensure robustness against underestimation. We also propose a dissatisfaction-aware asymmetric error score (DAES) to determine an appropriate model by considering the trade-off between underestimation and accuracy. Finally, Shapley additive explanation (SHAP) is applied to interpret the relationship trained by the model, enabling decision makers to use this information for improving outpatient service operations. We apply our framework in the endocrinology metabolism department and neurosurgery department in one of the largest hospitals in South Korea. The use of asymmetric functions prevents underestimation in the model, and with the proposed DAES, we can strike a balance in selecting the best model. By using SHAP, we can analytically interpret the waiting time in outpatient service (e.g., the length of the queue affects the waiting time the most) and provide explanations about the expected waiting time to patients. The proposed framework aids in improving operations, considering practical application in hospitals for real-time patient notification and minimizing patient dissatisfaction. Given the significance of managing hospital operations from the perspective of patients, this work is expected to contribute to operations improvement in health service practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.