ArticleHealth science reports2026
Optimization of Batch Centralized Health Examination Scheduling Considering Inter-Item Transition Time and Sex Differences: An Empirical Optimization Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: With increasing health awareness among Chinese residents, the demand for health examinations has continued to grow, placing mounting pressure on hospitals and health examination centers. This problem is particularly evident in group batch health examinations, where a large instantaneous flow of examinees and numerous examination items can easily lead to disorder in the examination process. This study aimed to optimize scheduling for this type of health examination, improve examination efficiency, and shorten total examination time. Methods: A health examination scheduling optimization model was developed with the objective of minimizing the maximum examination duration. The model incorporated path-dependent transition time between examination items and sex-related differences, and a genetic algorithm was designed to obtain scheduling solutions. For special group examination populations with precedence constraints among examination items, the model was modified, and a controlled experiment was designed to quantitatively evaluate the effects of introducing constraints on algorithm efficiency and optimization performance. Finally, experimental analyses were conducted, including model verification using small-scale benchmark examples, case analysis, AnyLogic simulation, and sensitivity analysis, to validate the effectiveness of the model and algorithm and the stability of the solutions. Results: Introducing constraints had only a minor effect on algorithm efficiency, although it reduced the optimization effect. Model verification showed that the differences in examination duration and transfer time were both 0, and the scheduling results satisfied the inter-item constraints, indicating that the model correctly implemented the predefined scheduling logic. In the case analysis, the optimized scheduling scheme yielded a maximum examination duration of 197.06 min, while the simulation result was 195.57 min, with a difference of only 1.49 min. Compared with the pre-optimization duration of 220 min, the simulation result represented an 11.10% reduction (24.43 min/220 min), confirming the effectiveness of the model and algorithm. Sensitivity analysis showed that, when service durations varied within ±5% and ±10%, most item-duration changes except ultrasound could be absorbed by the system buffer and had limited influence on the total examination duration, demonstrating a certain degree of stability in the model and algorithm solutions. Conclusion: The proposed mathematical programming model and genetic algorithm can significantly improve scheduling efficiency for batch centralized health examinations, substantially shorten overall examination duration, and have strong practical application value.
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.