COST CONTAINMENT AND ACCESS TO CARE: THE SHANGHAI HEALTH CARE FINANCING MODEL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The medical savings account (MSA) model of health care financing is viewed as a health care cost containment strategy. Yet, health care expenditure in Shanghai has increased sharply since the adoption of the MSA system. This paper looks into the health care reforms in Shanghai, especially since the introduction of the MSA scheme. From the Labor Insurance Scheme and Government Insurance Scheme to the Medical Savings Account scheme, ordinary Shanghai residents have not benefited from the most recent health care reforms. They have found medical care much less affordable. Disparity in access to health care access has become more evident than ever. Meanwhile, health care cost has increased sharply. China has benefited from an emphasis on prevention and primary care, but the government's recent policies give a high priority to catastrophic disease. This is not a cost-effective approach. Shanghai's health care system needs to break socioeconomic class boundaries if it is to construct a harmonious society. Shanghai's decision makers and various stakeholders have the resources and wisdom to face the challenge.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".