MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1576515867

Health Care Lessons from Sweden

2013· article· en· W1576515867 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nadeem Esmail

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsFraser Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careMedicineHRHISHealth policyEnvironmental healthPublic healthNursingEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is part of 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 Swedish health care system provides some of the best outcomes when compared with other developed nations that maintain universal approaches to health care insurance. Long considered a mecca of socialist thought, it is valuable to examine how the Swedes have structured their universal access health care system to help inform the Canadian debate over the future of Medicare.Health system performance — Canada compared to Sweden: 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 Swedish health care system broadly performs at a level similar to if not superior to that in Canada. Specifically, the Canadian health care system outperforms the Swedish health care system in six of 17 measures examined: one of three cancer survival rates, two of three measures of primary care performance, and three of six measures of patient safety. Conversely, the Swedish health care system outperforms the Canadian health care system in nine measures: infant mortality, mortality amenable to health care, all three measures of in-hospital mortality, one of three measures of primary care performance, and three of six measures of patient safety.Lessons for Canada: The combination of similar if not superior access to health care and similar if not superior outcomes from the health care process with 26% fewer resources committed to health care suggests there is much Canadians can learn from the Swedish health care system. A Swedish-style approach to health care in Canada would primarily require important changes to financial flows within provincial tax-funded systems and a greater reliance on competition and private ownership. It would not require a marked departure from the current tax-funded, provincially managed, federally supported health care system in Canada.The Swedish health care system departs from the Canadian model in the following important ways: Cost sharing for all forms of medical services; Salary payment for physicians; Some private provision of acute care hospital services; Activity-based funding for hospital care; Broad private parallel health care sector with dual practice.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0060.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicHealthcare Policy and Management→French-language works237,207→