2.L. Round table: Monitoring health reforms to inform policy innovation: the Health Systems and Policies Monitor
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background The European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies’ (Observatory) Health Systems and Policy Monitor (HSPM) network convenes an international group of around 50 national health systems researchers from over 40 institutions across 31 high-income countries, including all EU countries, Canada, Israel, the UK and the US. In advance of the HSPM annual meeting, experts share the current year’s “top-three” health reforms in their countries via a standardized survey, soliciting details on content and general implementation processes. Reforms are iteratively organized into to 2 of 11 clusters, derived from the WHO health system building blocks. Experts then discuss background, status and content of national reforms in the year’s main clusters and initiate cross-country collaborations. A repository of over 650 reforms since 2018 has been created and is available online, showcasing reform patterns in HSPM countries. The collected data have informed studies on reform trends in HSPM countries from 2018-2019 and between 2020-2022, with work ongoing. Data are also consulted by researchers and policymakers wishing to learn about and from reforms in other countries. This workshop specifically aims to: • Inform participants about the methodologies used by the HSPM network to track reforms • Highlight common trends in major health reforms across countries since 2018 • Discuss national health reforms and the value of understanding and tracking these across countries • Identify research gaps in reform monitoring relevant to policy makers • Discuss how the health system research community can generate more relevant and actionable evidence Added-value The comparative analysis of reform trends provides insights into how systems operate and the types of reforms more likely to be implemented. The sharing of these insights also serves as a source of inspiration, allowing countries to learn from each other’s successes and failures and adopt proven best practices. This is relevant for policymakers and researchers striving to support health systems strengthening. Therefore, the workshop will support knowledge exchange between researchers and policymakers by (1) informing researchers and policymakers about similar ongoing reforms in other countries and (2) identifying areas where researchers can contribute to country reform agendas, and (3) stimulating interest in cross-country collaborative research on similar and topical reforms in different countries. Format This is a roundtable workshop chaired and moderated by the Observatory. An overview of reform trends and patterns since 2018 will set the scene, followed by an interactive discussion with policymakers and HSPM network members to (1) delve into trend dynamics and implications for health policy and research and (2) identify major (missing) research areas relevant to policymakers. In addition, we will leverage the geographic scope and expertise of the audience to reflect on the value of monitoring reforms. Key messages • Cross-country exchange of information on reform trends and implementation patterns can inspire future reforms and help policymakers identify promising policy approaches abroad. • Knowledge exchange between researchers and policymakers helps to determine evidence gaps and to generate relevant and actionable evidence that can drive policy innovation. Speakers/Panelists Reinhard Busse Berlin University of Technology, Berlin, Germany Ines Fronteira National School of Public Health - NOVA University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal Iwona Kowalska-Bobko Jagiellonian University Medical College, Institute of Public Health, Cracow, Poland Isabel de La Mata DG SANTE, European Commission, Luxembourg, Luxembourg Vesna-Kestrin Petric Ministry of Health, Ljubljana, Slovenia
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,033 | 0,060 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,013 | 0,011 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,058 | 0,022 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».