MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104202477 · doi:10.12968/bjhc.2010.16.9.78368

The nature of healthcare costs and financial risk in commissioning

2010· article· en· W2104202477 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rod Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Healthcare Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProject commissioningUnderwritingInflation (cosmology)Actuarial scienceBusinessHealth careFinanceEconomicsPublishingPolitical scienceEconomic growthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The health insurance industry in the USA has noted a cycle of underwriting gains and losses which appeared to commence in the early to mid 1960s. After adjusting for inflation, unexplained step-like increases in total cost of approximately 6% appear to have occurred somewhere around 1962, 1966, 1974, 1979, 1986, 1990, 1998 and 2002. A similar pattern relating to medical emergency admissions has operated in the UK for at least 20 years. The implications of this behaviour tothe financial risk inherent in commissioning in England are discussed in this article. Data fromthe USA and Canada is used to complement the previous studies from the UK to explore causes for this behaviour.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.005
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Healthcare ManagementSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207