Health Care for All? Economics, Politics, and Delivery Systems
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Program Description Discussions regarding health care (HC) legislation, reform, and costs continue to be in the public conscience. The media in large part have presented little facts and the enacted health care law has been met with mixed responses from the public, HC sector, and politicians. A central philosophical and public health question is should everyone have covered HC? The panel will suppose the answer is yes and present evidence for what systems could succeed in the US. This program presents facts from national and worldwide experiences that have been essentially absent in media discussion forums. It will also provide participants with an analysis of the political environment surrounding the HC debate in the US. The potential implications of a universal health HC system versus a nationalized HC system on otolaryngologists in private and academic practices will be discussed. Health information technology (HIT) beyond the electronic health record is just beginning to become widely implemented. There is evidence of rapid shifts in how HIT and exchanges will change the current models of clinical practice with socioeconomic implications. The various ways HIT has been and will be used to improve quality of care, shift revenues, and impact access to information will be presented. This set of presenters collectively has experience in a wide breadth of health care systems including private, academic, US government, as well as the Canadian and United Kingdom HC systems. They will provide their perspectives on the current challenges and successes associated with their systems. In conclusion, the panelists will have a moderated question and answer session covering questions such as, what is the preferred model for delivering health care for all in the US and how would you fund it? What is the scope of practice considerations in Canada, UK and US? The audience will also be able to provide and view their answers using the interactive audience response system. Educational Objectives 1) Understand various government healthcare systems, politics of healthcare, and the impact on otolaryngologists. 2) Understand the current and future status of health information technology and exchanges beyond medical records. 3) Learn about global models of health care delivery from panelists with experience in varied healthcare systems.
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 | 0,000 | 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 ».