MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Public and private health‐care systems: what the literature says

2001· article· en· W2090624365 on OpenAlexaffabout
Donna M. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Administration · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationHealth carePublic healthLegislationPrivate sectorPublic administrationHealth policyInternational healthPolitical sciencePublic relationsBusinessHRHISHealth care reformMedicineNursingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Since policy‐makers and health‐care administrators across Canada are currently interested in using privatization as a method of health‐system reform, an analysis of public‐private health systems and privatization initiatives is relevant, if not critical, at this time. The widespread and long‐standing popularity and considerable successes of the Canadian health‐care system demand such an analysis. The many investigations and other evaluative reports describing the performance of health systems and privatization make this analysis possible. The author conducted an extensive review of research and other literature on health‐sector privatization and private‐ or public‐health systems. Three themes depicting various public‐private relationships were found: 1) public or private delivery, payment, and administration of health care; 2) integration or separation of public‐ and private‐health sectors; and 3) the conceptualization of health care as a commodity or a right. These themes are examined through the prism of the Canadian health‐care system and recent developments in Alberta. A discussion of their operational successes, failures, limitations and other issues follows. The literature review shows that privatization, particularly if undertaken in what has been an essentially “public” health system such as Canada's, needs to be approached ‐ if at all ‐ with caution. Increased controls such as new forms of legislation and regulation would clearly be necessary. Research to monitor the effect of privatization initiatives would also be needed. Sommaire: EAtant donné que les décideurs et administrateurs de soins de santé Canadiens s'intéressent actuellement à la privatisation comme méthode de réforme du système de santé, une analyse des systèmes de santé public et privé et des initiatives de privatisation est par conséquent pertinente sinon essentielle. La vaste popularité de longue date et le succès considérable du système de soins de santé canadien exigent une telle analyse. Cette analyse a été rendue possible grâce aux nombreuses enquêtes et autres rapports d'évaluation décrivant le rendement des systèmes de santé et la privatisation. L'auteur a mené un examen approfondi des documents de recherche et autres écrits concernant la privatisation du secteur de la santé et les systèmes de santé public et privé. Trois thèmes dépeignant diverses relations entreles systèmes public et privé sont ressortis de cet examen: 1) la prestation, le paiement et l'administration des soins de santé, publics ou privés. 2) l'intégration ou la séparation des secteurs de santé public et privé; et 3) la conceptualisation des soins de santé, en tant que produit ou droit. Ces thèmes sont examinés à travers le système canadien de soins de santé et certains faits récents survenus et Alberta. Un débat s'ensuit sur les succès opérationnels, les échecs, les limitations de ces systèmes respectifs et sur d'autres questions. L'analyse documentaire montre que la privatisation ‐ en particulier si elle est entreprise dans un systeme de santé essentiellement public °Comme c'est le cas au Canada ‐ doit être abordée avec prudence ou pas du tout. Il serait absolument nécessaire d'instaurer des contrôles accrus par le biais de nouvelles lois et de nouveaux règlements. Il serait également nécessaire de contrôler les répercussions des initiatives de privatisation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public AdministrationSame topicHealthcare Policy and ManagementFrench-language works237,207