Publications Database

Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!

The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:

  • Faculty Member’s Name;
  • Area of Expertise;
  • Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
  • Journal Name; and
  • Date Range.

At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.

If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.


Search Results

Adam Diamant, Anton Schevchenko, David Johnston, Fayez Quereshy (Forthcoming). "Consecutive Surgeries With Complications: The Impact of Scheduling Decisions", International Journal of Operations & Production Management.

View Paper

Abstract Purpose The authors determine how the scheduling and sequencing of surgeries by surgeons impacts the rate of post-surgical complications and patient length-of-stay in the hospital. Design/methodology/approach Leveraging a dataset of 29,169 surgeries performed by 111 surgeons from a large hospital network in Ontario, Canada, the authors perform a matched case-control regression analysis. The empirical findings are contextualized by interviews with surgeons from the authors’ dataset. Findings Surgical complications and longer hospital stays are more likely to occur in technically complex surgeries that follow a similarly complex surgery. The increased complication risk and length-of-hospital-stay is not mitigated by scheduling greater slack time between surgeries nor is it isolated to a few problematic surgery types, surgeons, surgical team configurations or temporal factors such as the timing of surgery within an operating day. Research limitations/implications There are four major limitations: (1) the inability to access data that reveals the cognition behind the behavior of the task performer and then directly links this behavior to quality outcomes; (2) the authors’ definition of task complexity may be too simplistic; (3) the authors’ analysis is predicated on the fact that surgeons in the study are independent contractors with hospital privileges and are responsible for scheduling the patients they operate on rather than outsourcing this responsibility to a scheduler (i.e. either a software system or an administrative professional); (4) although the empirical strategy attempts to control for confounding factors and selection bias in the estimate of the treatment effects, the authors cannot rule out that an unobserved confounder may be driving the results. Practical implications The study demonstrates that the scheduling and sequencing of patients can affect service quality outcomes (i.e. post-surgical complications) and investigates the effect that two operational levers have on performance. In particular, the authors find that introducing additional slack time between surgeries does not reduce the odds of back-to-back complications. This result runs counter to the traditional operations management perspective, which suggests scheduling more slack time between tasks may prevent or mitigate issues as they arise. However, the authors do find evidence suggesting that the risk of back-to-back complications may be reduced when surgical pairings are less complex and when the method involved in performing consecutive surgeries varies. Thus, interspersing procedures of different complexity levels may help to prevent poor quality outcomes. Originality/value The authors empirically connect choices made in scheduling work that varies in task complexity and to patient-centric health outcomes. The results have implications for achieving high-quality outcomes in settings where professionals deliver a variety of technically complex services.

Diamant, A., Johnston, D. and Quereshy, F. (2019). "Why Do Surgeons Schedule Their Own Surgeries?", Journal of Operations Management, 63(5), 262-281.

View Paper

Abstract Surgery is a knowledge intensive, high‐risk professional service. Most hospitals give surgeons considerable autonomy in deciding which patients to operate on and when. In theory, this allows surgeons the operational flexibility to prioritize surgeries based on intimate knowledge of their patient's clinical needs. At odds with this strategy is the operations management literature, which favors the standardization and centralization of scheduling focused on achieving the efficient use of all resources, such as operating room capacity. Unfortunately, a little is known as to how surgeons customize their schedules and why they value such control. To this end, we conduct an exploratory qualitative study of the scheduling behavior of surgeons at a large Canadian teaching hospital. We identify significant differences between surgeons as to their priorities when scheduling. Two constructs are formative in surgeon decision‐making: the timeliness of treatment for their patients and idiosyncratic personal priorities. Our work has implications for achieving surgeon support for initiatives to standardize and centralize routines for patient scheduling. Accordingly, we formulate propositions that address the conditions under which such efforts will achieve the desired balance between flexibility and efficiency.