Health reform in Alberta: The introduction of health regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: In 1994, the Government of Alberta passed the Regional Health Authorities Act to abolish nearly 200 existing local hospital and public health boards and replace them with seventeen regional health authorities. Consistent with the larger fiscal agenda, the government's intention was to address health‐care system efficiency through larger integrated management and governance structures. In this article, the authors examine why Alberta decided to create regional health authorities for the management and delivery of a significant range of health services. In examining the interaction of ideas, interests and institutions, the authors conclude that the government was partially successful in aligning existing institutional and interest relationships with an emerging political consensus about cost and sustainability of the health‐care system. Sommaire: En 1994, le gouvernement de l'Alberta a adopté la loi intitulée Regional Health Authorities Act ( Loi sur les offices régionaux de santé ) en vue d'abolir près de 200 commissions hospitalières et commissions de santé publique locales et de les remplacer par dix‐sept offices régionaux de la santé. Conformément au programme fiscal plus large, l'intention du gouvernement était d'examiner l'efficience du système des soins de santé grâce à des structures intégrées de gestion et de gouvernance plus vastes. Dans le présent article, les auteurs examinent les raisons pour lesquelles l'Alberta a décidé de créer des offices régionaux de la santé pour la gestion et la prestation d'une gamme importante de services de santé. Après avoir étudié les interactions d'idées, d'intérêts et d'institutions, les auteurs ont conclu que le gouvernement avait partiellement réussi à aligner les relations institutionnelles et les relations d'intérêts existantes sur un consensus politique émergent au sujet des coûts et de la viabilité du système de soins de santé.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".