Financial Management Reforms in the Health Sector: A Comparative Study Between Cash-based and Accrual-based Accounting Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Financial management and accounting reform in the public sectors was started in 2000. Moving from cash-based to accrual-based is considered as the key component of these reforms and adjustments in the public sector. Performing this reform in the health system is a part of a bigger reform under the new public management. OBJECTIVES: The current study aimed to analyze the movement from cash-based to accrual-based accounting in the health sector in Iran. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This comparative study was conducted in 2013 to compare financial management and movement from cash-based to accrual-based accounting in health sector in the countries such as the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Iran. Library resources and reputable databases such as Medline, Elsevier, Index Copernicus, DOAJ, EBSCO-CINAHL and SID, and Iranmedex were searched. Fish cards were used to collect the data. Data were compared and analyzed using comparative tables. RESULTS: Developed countries have implemented accrual-based accounting and utilized the valid, reliable and practical information in accrual-based reporting in different areas such as price and tariffs setting, operational budgeting, public accounting, performance evaluation and comparison and evidence based decision making. In Iran, however, only a few public organizations such as the municipalities and the universities of medical sciences use accrual-based accounting, but despite what is required by law, the other public organizations do not use accrual-based accounting. CONCLUSIONS: There are advantages in applying accrual-based accounting in the public sector which certainly depends on how this system is implemented in the sector.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".