The Cost and Impact of the Interim Federal Health Program Cuts on Child Refugees in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: On June 30, 2012, Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) funding was cut for refugee claimant healthcare. The potential financial and healthcare impacts of these cuts on refugee claimants are unknown. METHODS: We conducted a one-year retrospective chart review spanning 6 months before and after IFHP funding cuts at The Hospital for Sick Children, a tertiary care children's hospital in Toronto. We analyzed emergency room visits characteristics, admission rates, reasons for admission, and financial records including billing from Medavie Blue Cross. RESULTS: There were 173 refugee children visits to the emergency room in the six months before and 142 visits in the six months after funding cuts. The total amount billed to the IFHP program during the one-year of this study was $131,615. Prior to the IFHP cuts, 46% of the total emergency room bills were paid by IFHP compared to 7% after the cuts (p<0.001). INTERPRETATION: After the cuts to the IFHP, The Hospital for Sick Children was unable to obtain federal health coverage for the vast majority of refugee claimant children registered under the IFHP. This preliminary analysis showed that post-IFHP cuts healthcare costs at the largest tertiary pediatric institution in the country increased.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".