MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104702014 · doi:10.1093/heapol/czi037

Comparative quality of private and public health services in rural Vietnam

2005· article· en· W2104702014 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Policy and Planning · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Systems and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionUniversity of SydneyUniversity of Newcastle AustraliaEmory UniversityRockefeller Foundation
KeywordsPrivate sectorGovernment (linguistics)BusinessPopulationHealth careQuarter (Canadian coin)Public sectorPublic healthRural areaQuality (philosophy)Environmental healthFamily medicineMedicineEconomic growthNursingGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Private health care services were officially recognized in Vietnam in 1989, and for the last 15 years have competed with the public health system in providing primary curative care and pharmaceutical sales to rural populations. However, the quality of these private and public health care services has not been evaluated and compared. METHODS: A community-based survey was conducted in 30 of the 160 communes in Hung Yen, which were selected by probability proportional to population size (PPS) sampling. All commune health centres (CHCs) and private health care providers in the selected communes were surveyed on human resources, services provided, availability of medical equipment and pharmaceuticals, knowledge and clinical performance for acute and chronic problems. Patient satisfaction and cost of care associated with recent illness were measured using a random household survey covering 30 households from each of the selected communes. RESULTS: There were 11.5 private providers per 10,000 population, compared with 6.7 public providers per 10,000. A quarter of private providers were employees of the public health sector. Less than 20% of the private providers had registered their practice with the government system. Eleven per cent (26/234) had no professional qualifications. Fifty-eight per cent (135/234) provided treatment as well as selling medications. Public sector infrastructure was superior to that of the private providers. The quality of services provided by public providers was poor but significantly better than that of private providers. Patient satisfaction and costs of care were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Private providers are successfully competing with the public health centre system in rural areas but not because they provide cheaper or better services. The quality of private health care services is not controlled and is significantly poorer than public services. Current practice in both systems falls below the national standard, especially for the management of chronic health problems. The low quality of health care services at a community level may help explain the previously observed phenomena of high levels of self-medicating, low utilization of commune health centres and over-utilization of tertiary health care facilities.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.239 · 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