MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Does Major Illness Cause Financial Catastrophe?

2009· article· en· W2146482278 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Services Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
FundersNational Institute on AgingRobert Wood Johnson Foundation
KeywordsHealth and Retirement StudyMedicineHealth insuranceDemographyGerontologyEconomicsHealth careEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We examine the financial impact of major illnesses on the near-elderly and how this impact is affected by health insurance. DATA SOURCES: We use RAND Corporation extracts from the Health and Retirement Study from 1992 to 2006.(1) STUDY DESIGN: Our dependent variable is the change in household assets, excluding the value of the primary home. We use triple difference median regressions on a sample of newly ill/uninsured near elderly (under age 65) matched to newly ill/insured near elderly. We also include a matched control group of households whose members are not ill. RESULTS: Controlling for the effects of insurance status and illness, we find that the median household with a newly ill, uninsured individual suffers a statistically significant decline in household assets of between 30 and 50 percent relative to households with matched insured individuals. Newly ill, insured individuals do not experience a decline in wealth. CONCLUSIONS: Newly ill/uninsured households appear to be one illness away from financial catastrophe. Newly ill insured households who are matched to uninsured households appear to be protected against financial loss, at least in the near term.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.318 · 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