Acute care restructuring in Newfoundland and Labrador: the history and impact on expenditure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To document the history of regionalization and its effects on the Newfoundland and Labrador acute care health system, and to describe changes in acute care expenditure in the St John's region where hospital redesign, closure and aggregation occurred in relation to other regions not exposed to aggregation. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with senior health officials. Transcripts and other reports were reviewed. Financial data were abstracted from audited general ledger statements received from the Ministry of Health. RESULTS: Regionalization achieved its objectives of hospital aggregation in St John's. The average number of full-time equivalent employees increased slightly by 2% (5304-5416). In some regions, integration of services was delayed because of conflict and resistance to change. There was some disparity between the Provincial Government's objectives for cost control and the CEOs' perceptions of economies of scale. Between 1995/96 and 2002/03, total expenditures for the St John's region and the other five regional hospitals increased by 46% and 54%, respectively; total personal income of the population and government revenues increased by only 18% and 16%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Regionalization in Newfoundland and Labrador facilitated aggregation of hospitals, but did not control the number of front-line workers and, consequently, total acute care expenditure. Expenditure increased significantly between 1995 and 2002, at a rate which exceeded the increase in government revenues. The government's ability to pay for acute care will not be achieved unless employee costs are controlled or provincial income increases.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".