The precarious balance between ‘supply’ and ‘demand’ for health care: The increasing global demand for rehabilitation service for individuals living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is becoming a critical health concern that affects people living in high-, middle-, and low-income countries. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has been demonstrated to be a clinical and cost-effective approach to minimizing the effects of COPD. Despite global predictions of an increased incidence of COPD, there continues to be an important misalignment between the demand and the supply of PR services. In other words, only a small proportion of individuals with COPD who require, or would benefit from, PR programs are receiving them on the global stage. This issue may be even more pronounced in middle- and low-income countries where the burden of disease is reported to be highest, and where access to health services and trained health professionals appears be to lowest. Given this predicament, we suggest that PR services must be viewed as an effective way in which to generate clinical efficiencies within health systems, and has the potential to relieve pressure on acute care systems. Although implementing PR programs require commitment and financial investment, we argue that such investments would yield important social and aggregated financial cost savings in the long term.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".