MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6967937382 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15052670

#SOCIAL AND MEDICAL INSURANCE

2025· article· en· W6967937382 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
ThématiqueHealthcare Systems and Reforms
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSelf-insuranceKey person insuranceGroup insuranceSocial insuranceIncome protection insuranceHealth careInsurance lawCasualty insuranceSocial securityInsurance policy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

#SOCIAL AND MEDICAL INSURANCE An article by Rutuja Aher and Sakshi Nigal under guidance of moldoev sir Abstract: In modern countries, social and medical insurance programs serve as key foundations of welfare state systems, aimed at providing financial protection and access to healthcare services for their populations. This article provides an overview of the variety of these programs, covers the theoretical rationale, models of implementation, such as universal healthcare, social health insurance, private insurance with governmental subsidization, the benefits and drawbacks of these programs. The article considers various contexts and approaches to health care through social, economic, and ethical lenses and highlights equity, efficiency, and sustainability related implications. The article ends with some discussion on recent trends and curricular or scholarly directions in the field, stressing the need for adaptable and innovative policy suggestions for unknown socioeconomic contexts and changing healthcare needs. Introduction: In modern society, social and medical insurance are the cornerstones of social security and are the symbols of a commitment to protect citizens' health and secure them from economic adversity in times of illness, disability, unemployment, and old age. Although there are discussions relating to social insurance and medical insurance separately, these two kinds of insurance are a web of inter-related risks. Both are meant to provide levels of assistance and some measure of safety to persons and families in times when risks materialize. Social insurance includes all social programs dealing with risks, such as unemployment and retirement, while medical insurance is restricted to risk against accessing healthcare and not bearing the burden of medical costs directly. The nature of design and implementation in different countries is quite different due to different historical, political, and economical realities. This article intends to give a comparative description of social and medical insurance, their models, benefits, challenges, and the implications of various policies. Content: 1. Theoretical Framework and Underpinning Principles:• Principles of Social Insurance:The three critical building blocks of social insurance are essential to its success across all ages:Compulsory Participation: Mandatory contributions to build up an adequate size risk pool and coverage.Defined Benefits: Amount of benefits are defined by contributions and eligibility.Social Solidarity: Sharing of risk and reallocation of resources between segments of the population.Regulated system through Government Agencies: Operated and regulated through government agencies.• Principles of Medical Insurance:Identifying the necessary principles of medical insurance to assist any person at any age:Universal Access: Equal access to any health service for all citizens.Financial Protection: Covering any person and households from catastrophic costs.Quality of care: High quality services and health outcomes.Efficiency: Reducing administration burden and efficient use of resources. 2. Financing Models for Social Insurance and Medical Insurance: • Social Insurance Models: Universal Basic Income (UBI): * Regular, guaranteed cash transfers to every citizen, regardless of income or employment. Unemployment Insurance: * Unless the worker acted wrongly, benefits for people who became unemployed. Old Age Pensions: * Money for retirement on a government-subsidized or mandatory basis versus private pension. • Medical Insurance Models: Universal Healthcare (Single-Payer Systems): Government-funded, government-administered universal access to healthcare services system (Canada, United Kingdom).Emphasizes equity, cost-containment, and preventative care Social Health Insurance (SHI): * Individuals make mandatory contributions to non-profit, private health insurance funds, usually with governmental subsidies. (Germany, France) Emphasizes social solidarity, and competitions that are regulated, and stakeholders provide input. Private Insurance With Government Subsidies: Market-based system that uses private for-profit insurance companies but is regulated by government with public subsidies available for low-income people (United States- Affordable Care Act). Emphasizes individual choice, competitive markets, and minimal government intervention in health care. 3.Benefits of Social Health Insurance and Medical Health Insurance in Terms of Visibility: • Social Benefits: o Poverty Alleviation: It has been noted that families in receipt of social benefits have an established lower chance of being impoverished and less likely to contend with food insecurity or a deficiency in basic requirements. Thus, it was noted that welfare policies reduce income inequality and help create a social safety net that will provide for members of society in a position of vulnerability. o Economic Stability: Apart from deprivation of social benefits like social grant stabilization of consumer demand for essential goods and services, it also creates strong economic stimulation, and promotes social cohesion of the population particularly in trying times which is good for the economy of a country. o Improved Health Outcomes: Access to health-related social benefits and preventive measures through your HMO typically promotes better health outcomes. Life has certain extraneous stressors which often negate good health outcomes, access to which would not have been possible without social health care. Access to preventive care is usually directly proportional to good health. • Medical Benefits - o Access to Care: Having health care insurance which is trustworthy allows for timely and inexpensive access to necessary preventive health services or health care. o Financial Security: Retain health coverage usually proceeds from the family member being protected against all medical debts from disaster medical emergencies or complications, or high-cost constant medical care. o Improved Health Outcomes: Medical insurance coverage has been shown to improve offshoots of other health indicators, hence positively affecting health dynamics through timely diagnosis and treatment via access to preventative care. o Reduced Health Disparities: The low-income populations face obstacles viciously correlated to their health. Their present socioeconomic state opposes their health and impedes them from overcoming an oppressive socioeconomic situation, which can alleviate health disparities between certain socioeconomic subpopulations. 4. Barriers and Trade-offs: • Financial: * The aging society coupled with rising healthcare costs and economic void will squeeze financial viability in social systems and medical coverage. * Ways of improving financial viability include increasing premiums, better resource allocation, and promotion of preventive services. • Equity and Access: * Fair access to services for all segments of the population without consideration for income, locality, or social status. * This may include targeted interventions and policy changes to eradicate health inequity. • Effectiveness-Quality: * Provide effective services whilst containing costs and assuring good quality, patient-oriented care. * Implementing technology and evidence-based practice to ensure high-quality innovative systems and increase efficiency in effectiveness in care delivery. • Moral Hazard-Adverse Selection: * Regulator of increased use of healthcare because of having insurance (moral hazard-rising demand) and sick people enrolling into insurance plans (adverse selection). * To redistributing cost (co-pay, deductible), risk adjustment, and implementation of managed care plans on the insurance side may be options to mitigate. 5. New Directions and Trends: With the introduction of technology, such as telehealth and AI and digital health technologies that facilitate access and make care delivery efficient and high quality; personalization of medicine, where therapies and interventions are based on the individual's genetics, lifestyle, and environment; integrated care, where a person's care across different settings and different providers is coordinated to achieve better outcomes and lower costs; a focus on prevention, meaning preventive care and health promotion to reduce morbidity through chronic diseases; and managing demographic changes, adjusting social and medical insurance systems to support the aging population and changing family structures. Conclusion: Social and medical insurance systems serve as a grounding stone for social welfare, the stabilizing of economies, and modern access to health care. While there might be many models for accomplishing these goals, the essential objectives remain constant: financial protection, equitable access to services, and improving the health of the population. Increased challenges to financial sustainability, equity, and quality and efficiency in the face of moving societies thus require a process of continuous adaptation and innovation in order to develop long-term viable and effective social and medical insurance systems. This must be underscored by robust evidence-based policy, stakeholder engagement, and advancing the Triple Aim to improve patient experience, improve the health of populations, and reduce costs. References: 1. Barr, N. (2012). The Economics of the Welfare State. Oxford University Press. 2. Marmor, T. R., Mashaw, J. L., & Oberlander, J. (2012). American Health Care: Government, Market Processes, and the Public Interest. Yale University Press. 3. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2023). Health at a Glance. OECD Publishing. 4. Pierson, P. (2001). The New Politics of the Welfare State. Oxford University Press. 5. World Health Organization (WHO). (2023). Universal Health Coverage. WHO. int.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,049
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,162

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,003
Communication savante0,0040,004
Science ouverte0,0010,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0050,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0490,012

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 Opus0,052
Tête enseignante GPT0,272
Écart entre enseignants0,220 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

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
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Même sujetHealthcare Systems and ReformsTravaux en français237 207