MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147693554 · doi:10.1017/s1744133111000211

Healthcare policy tools as determinants of health-system efficiency: evidence from the OECD

2011· article· en· W2147693554 on OpenAlexaff
Wiesława Dominika Wranik

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Economics Policy and Law · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemunerationGatekeepingHealth careCost sharingHealthcare systemStochastic frontier analysisPublic economicsPaymentPerspective (graphical)BusinessActuarial scienceCost efficiencyHealth policyCapitationPeer effectsEconomicsFinanceMedicineEconomic growthMicroeconomicsComputer scienceNursingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper assesses which policy-relevant characteristics of a healthcare system contribute to health-system efficiency. Health-system efficiency is measured using the stochastic frontier approach. Characteristics of the health system are included as determinants of efficiency. Data from 21 OECD countries from 1970 to 2008 are analysed. Results indicate that broader health-system structures, such as Beveridgian or Bismarckian financing arrangements or gatekeeping, are not significant determinants of efficiency. Significant contributors to efficiency are policy instruments that directly target patient behaviours, such as insurance coverage and cost sharing, and those that directly target physician behaviours, such as physician payment methods. From the perspective of the policymaker, changes in cost-sharing arrangements or physician remuneration are politically easier to implement than changes to the foundational financing structure of the system.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.213
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Economics Policy and LawSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207