Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This paper is the first in a series that examines the way health services are funded and delivered in other nations. The nations profiled all aim to achieve the noble goal of Canada’s health care system: access to high quality care regardless of ability to pay. How they organize to achieve that goal differs markedly from the Canadian approach. So do their performances and results.The first nation studied in this series is Australia. The Australian health care system provides some of the best outcomes when compared with other developed nations that have universal approaches to health care insurance. A careful examination of the Australian health care system will provide insights and information that will be useful in the Canadian debate over the future of Medicare.Health system performance — Canada compared to Australia: Looking at factors such as the ability of the health care system to provide healthy longevity, low levels of mortality from disease, and effective treatment for both chronic and terminal illnesses, it seems the Australian health care system broadly performs at a level similar, if not superior, to that in Canada. Specifically, the Canadian health care system outperforms the Australia’s in four of 13 measures examined: two of three measures of primary care performance, and two of five measures of patient safety. Conversely, the Australian health care system outperforms the Canada’s in eight measures: infant mortality, mortality amenable to health care, two of three measures of in-hospital mortality, one of three measures of primary care performance, and three of five measures of patient safety.Lessons for Canada: The combination of superior access to health care and potentially superior health outcomes for substantially lower cost suggests there is much Canadians can learn from the Australian health care system. Importantly, emulating the Australian health care system would not require a marked departure from the current tax-funded, provincially managed, federally supported health care system in Canada. An Australian approach to health care in Canada would primarily require important changes to financial flows within provincial tax-funded systems, a greater reliance on competition and private ownership, and public support for private insurance cover.The Australian health care system departs from the Canadian model in the following important ways: cost sharing for outpatient medical services; some private provision of hospital and surgical services; activity-based funding for hospital care; broad private, parallel health care sector with taxpayer support and dual practice.Of these core policy differences, three can be implemented by Canada’s provinces without violating the letter of the Canada Health Act (CHA): private hospital services and surgical facilities; activity-based funding; and public support for private insurance coverage with dual practice.
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 | 0,004 | 0,015 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,009 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,017 | 0,002 |
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 ».