How to Achieve a High-Performance Health Care System in the United States
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Letters6 May 2008How to Achieve a High-Performance Health Care System in the United StatesJack A. Ginsburg, MPE, Robert B. Doherty, and J. Fred Ralston Jr., MDJack A. Ginsburg, MPEFrom the American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, PA 19106.Search for more papers by this author, Robert B. DohertyFrom the American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, PA 19106.Search for more papers by this author, and J. Fred Ralston Jr., MDFrom the American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, PA 19106.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-148-9-200805060-00021 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail IN RESPONSE:Everyone who wrote a letter raised important points that should be considered by public policymakers for achieving universal health insurance coverage. The American College of Physicians identified 2 pathways for consideration: a single-payer model or a pluralistic model with legal guarantees for coverage and subsidies for those who cannot afford it. The College did not recommend one pathway over the other—it noted the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. It examined the U.S. health care system and those of 12 other countries, determined what lessons could be learned, and made recommendations for consideration to ensure that all people ...References1. American College of Physicians–American Society of Internal Medicine. Physicians and joint negotiations. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:787-92. [PMID: 11329239] Google Scholar2. American College of Physicians. Linking Physician Payments to Quality Care. Philadelphia: American Coll Physicians; 2005. Accessed at www.acponline.org/advocacy/where_we_stand/policy/link_pay.pdf on 21 March 2008. Google Scholar3. American College of Physicians. Reform of the Dysfunctional Healthcare Payment and Delivery System. Philadelphia: American Coll Physicians; 2006. Accessed at www.acponline.org/advocacy/where_we_stand/policy/dysfunctional_payment.pdf on 21 March 2008. Google Scholar4. Braddock CH, Snyder L, for the American College of Physicians Ethics and Human Rights Committee. Ethics and Time, Time Perception, and the Patient–Physician Relationship. Philadelphia: American Coll Physicians; 2005. Accessed at www.acponline.org/running_practice/ethics/issues/policy/ethics_timeplace.pdf on 21 March 2008. Google Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: From the American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, PA 19106.Disclosures: None disclosed. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoPhysicians and Joint NegotiationsPhysicians and Joint NegotiationsAchieving a High-Performance Health Care System with Universal Access: What the United States Can Learn from Other CountriesHow to Achieve a High-Performance Health Care System in the United States S. Ward Casscells and MG Elder Granger How to Achieve a High-Performance Health Care System in the United States Arvind R. Cavale How to Achieve a High-Performance Health Care System in the United States Richard S. Leff How to Achieve a High-Performance Health Care System in the United States Richard L. Cruess and Sylvia R. Cruess How to Achieve a High-Performance Health Care System in the United States Thomas James III How to Achieve a High-Performance Health Care System in the United States Harvey S. Zarren Metrics Cited ByEnvisioning a Better U.S. Health Care System for All: Reducing Barriers to Care and Addressing Social Determinants of HealthRenee Butkus, BA, Katherine Rapp, BS, Thomas G. Cooney, MD, and Lee S. Engel, MD, for the Health and Public Policy Committee of the American College of Physicians*Comparison of Rate of Utilization of Medicare Services in Private Versus Academic Cardiology PracticePutting Patients First by Reducing Administrative Tasks in Health Care: A Position Paper of the American College of PhysiciansShari M. Erickson, MPH, Brooke Rockwern, MPH, Michelle Koltov, MPH, and Robert M. McLean, MD, for the Medical Practice and Quality Committee of the American College of Physicians*Anticipating the Unintended Consequences of Closing the Door on Physician Self-ReferralPsychosocial difficulties from the perspective of persons with neuropsychiatric disordersExploring Value in Congenital Heart Disease: An Evaluation of Inpatient AdmissionsUtilizing Health Information Technology to Support Universal Healthcare Delivery: Experience of a National Healthcare SystemAre Physician Productivity and Quality of Care Related?Health care experiences of U.S. Retirees living in Mexico and Panama: a qualitative studyAccess to medical care: How do women in Canada and the United States compare?Five Things Physicians and Patients Should Question in Hospice and Palliative MedicineImpact of Socioeconomic Status and Sociodemographic Factors on Melanoma Presentation Among Ethnic MinoritiesA pharmacy's journey toward the patient-centered medical homeUniversal Health Care Coverage in the United States: Is It “Slip Slidin' Away”?Robert B. Doherty, BAComparing population health in the United States and CanadaMedical Providers as Global Warming and Climate Change Health Educators: A Health Literacy ApproachQuality Time in HealthcareDutch Electronic Medical Record - Complexity PerspectiveThe Obama Administration's Options for Health Care Cost Control: Hope Versus RealityTheodore Marmor, PhD, Jonathan Oberlander, PhD, and Joseph White, PhDA retrospective analysis of health systems in Denmark and Kaiser Permanente 6 May 2008Volume 148, Issue 9Page: 712KeywordsArmed forcesConflicts of interestFearHealth careHealth insuranceMedical educationMotivationPatientsResearch and reporting methods ePublished: 6 May 2008 Issue Published: 6 May 2008 CopyrightCopyright © 2008 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF DownloadLoading ...
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».