MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1495626663

Three essays in health economics: 1. An equilibrium model of waiting lists for medical care. 2. An evaluation of alternative econometric specifications for estimating a tobacco budget share equation. 3. The determinants of expenditures on tobacco in Canada

2000· dissertation· en· W1495626663 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael G. Farnworth

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2000
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometric modelEconomicsHealth economicsEconometricsHealth careStructural equation modelingActuarial scienceMathematicsStatisticsEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis consists of three essays on health economics. Chapter 1 is an introduction. Chapter 2 studies waiting lists for medical care, and Chapters 3 and 4 study the demand for tobacco products. The main contribution of Chapter 2 is a game-theoretic model of waiting times for medical care that provides new insights into how health care waiting times and the number of cases treated may be related. The model demonstrates that charging patients for medical care may not result in decreased waiting times. One policy implication of the model is the potential gains from the sharing of information and co-ordination among health-care providers. Chapters 3 and 4 are on the demand for tobacco products. Estimating the demand for tobacco involves choosing one or more econometric specifications or functional forms. Different econometric specifications can result in conflicting results, raising questions about how to interpret results. A primary objective of Chapter 3 is to identify the similarities and differences between three econometric specifications that have often been applied to tobacco data. A behavioural model is a useful starting point for making these comparisons. In this chapter I compare the results arrived at by applying different specifications to one data set. This data set reports individual's expenditure on tobacco. Chapter 4 examines a data set that reports household expenditure on tobacco. A number of economics papers examine tobacco data from the United States, the United Kingdom and Spain. Chapter 4 examines tobacco data from Canada. One finding indicates that households that do not own their home and consist of one or more unemployed individuals tend to purchase a relatively high amount of tobacco. This information may be of interest to people involved in tobacco policy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.129
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacSphere (McMaster University)Same topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207