MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121734159 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.20762835

Revisiting Health and Income Inequality Relationship: Evidence from Developing Countries

2012· article· en· W2121734159 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Habibullah Pulok

Bibliographic record

VenueMunich Personal RePEc Archive (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsEconomic inequalityInequalityDeveloping countryPanel dataDemographic economicsIncome distributionDistribution (mathematics)Income inequality metricsPopulationFixed effects modelEconometricsEconomic growthMedicineMathematicsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In general, countries with more equal distribution of income enjoy better health. Earlier empirical studies on the relationship between income distribution and health at country level present strong evidence that income inequality on an average impedes the improvement of population health. However, a majority of these empirical studies are based on data from either only developed countries or pooled data from developing and developed countries. They mainly study the relationship at a single point of time or at an average of several years. These studies also fail to take into account the country specific unobserved heterogeneity. Departing from the general trend of the current literature, this paper examines the health-income inequality hypothesis using panel data from 31 low income and low middle income countries for the period of 1982-2002. Application of fixed effects and random effects model to control for country specific heterogeneity in this study provides contradictory findings to the existing cross country studies. In other words, empirical results of this paper confirm that there is a positive relation between health and income distribution in this set of developing countries over the study period.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMunich Personal RePEc Archive (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich)Same topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207