MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1542999848 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v8n2p93

Health Care Expenditure and GDP in Oil Exporting Countries: Evidence From OPEC Data, 1995-2012

2015· article· en· W1542999848 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ali Akbar Fazaeli, Hossein Ghaderi, Masoud ‎Salehi

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIran University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsCointegrationEconomicsUnit rootPanel dataHealth careGranger causalityDeveloping countryCausality (physics)Demographic economicsEconomic growthEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is a large body of literature examining income in relation to health expenditures. The share of expenditures in health sector from GDP in developed countries is often larger than in non-developed countries, suggesting that as the level of economic growth increases, health spending increase, too. OBJECTIVES: This paper estimates long-run relationships between health expenditures and GDP based on panel data of a sample of 12 countries of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), using data for the period 1995-2012. PATIENTS & METHODS: We use panel data unit root tests, cointegration analysis and ECM model to find long-run and short-run relation. This study examines whether health is a luxury or a necessity for OPEC countries within a unit root and cointegration framework. RESULTS: Panel data analysis indicates that health expenditures and GDP are co-integrated and have Engle and Granger causality. In addition, in oil countries that have oil export income, the share of government expenditures in the health sector is often greater than in private health expenditures similar developed countries. CONCLUSIONS: The findings verify that health care is not a luxury good and income has a robust relationship to health expenditures in OPEC countries.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207