MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Income Disparity, Inequity Aversion and the Design of the Healthcare System

2009· article· en· W2159232252 on OpenAlexaff
John Leach

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Economics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careWelfarePublic health insuranceSocial insuranceInequity aversionEconomicsSocial welfare functionInequalityPublic economicsSocial WelfarePublic healthcareHealthcare systemHealth insuranceBusinessActuarial scienceEconomic growthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An ex post social welfare function is used to evaluate alternative healthcare systems. If a society is averse to inequality and there is some income disparity, social welfare under private healthcare insurance is sometimes higher and sometimes lower than social welfare under public healthcare. However, a third system—public healthcare with the option to purchase supplemental healthcare insurance—is always socially preferred to private healthcare insurance. Moreover, it is either socially preferred to public healthcare or equivalent to it.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.308 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Journal of EconomicsSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207