Medical tourism in the Caribbean region: a call to consider environmental health equity.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medical tourism, which is the intentional travel by private-paying patients across international borders for medical treatment, is a sector that has been targeted for growth in many Caribbean countries. The international development of this industry has raised a core set of proposed health equity benefits and drawbacks for host countries. These benefits centre on the potential investment in health infrastructure and opportunities for health labour force development while drawbacks focus on the potential for reduced access to healthcare for locals and inefficient use of limited public resources to support the growth of the medical tourism industry. The development of the medical tourism sector in Caribbean countries raises additional health equity questions that have received little attention in existing international debates, specifically in regard to environmental health equity. In this viewpoint, we introduce questions of environmental health equity that clearly emerge in relation to the developing Caribbean medical tourism sector These questions acknowledge that the growth of this sector will have impacts on the social and physical environments, resources, and waste management infrastructure in countries. We contend that in addition to addressing the wider health equity concerns that have been consistently raised in existing debates surrounding the growth of medical tourism, planning for growth in this sector in the Caribbean must take environmental health equity into account in order to ensure that local populations, environments, and ecosystems are not harmed by facilities catering to international patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".