MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1517194378

Solving the Health Care Problem. How Other Nations Succeeded and Why the United States Has Not

2007· article· en· W1517194378 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Woodley

Notice bibliographique

RevueHealth Sociology Review · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
ThématiqueHealthcare Policy and Management
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHealth careGovernment (linguistics)SociologyState (computer science)CasualPower (physics)PoliticsPublic policyLawPublic administrationLaw and economicsPolitical science
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

SOLVING THE HEALTH CARE PROBLEM. HOW OTHER NATIONS SUCCEEDED AND WHY THE UNITED STATES HAS NOT Pamela Behan Albany: State University of New York Press 2006, HB 172 pp, USD 60 ISBN: 978-0-7914-6837-1The health system of the United States stands out amongst those of developed economies on two grounds: its cost and the lack of a universal health insurance program. In this short book Pamela Behan sets out to explore '... why the United States does not guarantee its citizens access to health care or protect them from its costs'. Devoting about as much attention to describing theory and method as to analysing and comparing three health care systems (the United States, Canada and Australia), Behan starts with a thorough introduction, canvassing a range of theories for explaining the direction of public policy. The author settles on some particular theories to test, and examines the comparative method of policy analysis. In general, Behan puts aside theories which attribute outcomes of policy to single casual factors, and focuses on what might be considered two classes of theory to be applied to the comparative analysis that follows. The first she describes as political institutional theories: approaches that stress the roles of the structures of government in shaping policy. The second Behan describes as 'power resources theory', a class-based view of history and society, calling attention to 'the balance of politically useful resources controlled by the capitalist and working classes in a given society' (2006:xiv).While the author invites readers to skip this chapter and to launch into the descriptions and analyses of the three health care systems under review, I found this introduction of the problem, the theory and the method to be the most interesting and useful part of the book. It is concise and well structured.The core of the book consists of three chapters, each describing the evolution of health care financing policy in the countries under review. Drawing largely on a narrow range of reputable secondary sources, each chapter describes briefly the history of settlement and the development of government before outlining the major turning points in the processes by which the respective colonial, then provincial/state and federal governments defined their roles in financing health care. Each of these chapters ends with an analysis of the factors that led to a system of 'national health insurance' (Canada and Australia) or prevented such a system from being adopted (the United States).Each case study bears out the influences of political institutions and the distribution and utilisation of power that the introductory chapter foreshadowed. In her analysis of the Canadian experience, the author highlights the effect of third political parties in the emergence public health insurance at provincial and federal levels, and the relative lack of veto points, that is, institutional barriers to the enactment of the aspirations of executive government. The chapter on Australia highlights the several cycles of building and dismantling public health insurance since the Second World War as being a unique feature of that country's health financing policy. The author concludes this chapter with the view that decisive factors leading to the introduction of public health insurance in Australia have been the 'political polarisation of Australian society' (2006:33), as well as the creation of the Australian Labor Party and the opportunities presented by the parliamentary system for parties with a majority to implement their policies. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,896
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,153
Tête enseignante GPT0,362
Écart entre enseignants0,209 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2007
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHealth Sociology ReviewMême sujetHealthcare Policy and ManagementTravaux en français237 207