Bibliographic record
Abstract
Examines the California experience from year-end 1997 through the beginning of 2002 to identify lessons that can be applied to the national M+C environment. California enrollees account for about one-quarter of the national enrollment in the M+C program, and the state has a much higher market penetration rate than the rest of the nation. The market in California is dominated by three national firms—Kaiser-Permanente, PacifiCare, and Health Net—which account for 83 percent of M+C enrollment in the state. While the maturity of California’s market has contributed to some stability and California has been less affected by withdrawals than other states, the same market pressures—such as physician networking problems and cost pressures—that are affecting other states are also impacting California. Furthermore, health plans that use a delegated risk model are under much more pressure than firms with an integrated delivery structure. The authors note that provider infrastructure and contracting have had a large influence on the program's success, and M+C will likely remain an almost exclusively urban product.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".