Bibliographic record
Abstract
not counted.In reality the provision and delivery of health care coincides with consumption and cannot be separated, in particular in emergency contexts.Procedures and treatments cannot be stored like products of the manufacturing or drug industries; it is rather a matter of oversupply or undersupply of facilities and personnel in relation to health care needs or demands.It follows that the subjects of cost effectiveness evaluation as conceptualised in the book mainly are elective procedures.The effects of hospital teaching status on the outcome of acute myocardial infarction have been shown to be large.The authors use the classic assumptions of advantages of scale economies and scope economies omitting the recognised fact that there are diseconomies of scale in hospitals.2 The evi- dence on the effects of the hospital teaching status and scale on outcomes compared with costs would deserve some comments.It is possible that the economic evaluation would appeal a broader audience if its examples extended behind ''whether drugs or surgery are the most cost-effective ways of treating angina''.
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 | 0.078 | 0.240 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.041 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.023 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.087 | 0.021 |
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".