Health management education in Europe and in the United States: A comparative review and analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Europe and in the United States, health management education and the role of health managers are patterned and consistent with how the country's healthcare system is organized, managed, and financed. In the United States, the fee-for-service, entrepreneurial dominated approach, resulting in health being one of the few remaining growth industries, has created a huge demand for additional health management education programs and managers. Therefore, universities finding themselves in an economic slump are attracted to establish health services administration programs (a North American term) since they require limited capital, continue to attract enrollment, and contribute to the "social good." In contrast, the European countries' healthcare systems provide universal access to care and strict, governmental fiscal control on healthcare expenditures. As a result, the American masters-level health manager model has not thrived there--although not willingly conceded is the fact that in Europe physicians continue to dominate the management ranks. After outlining a number of the current problems facing US health management education, this article focuses on: (1) a projected shuttering of the weaker American health management programs and the market for health managers being overly saturated (such as for lawyers now), because the US gross domestic product expenditures for health will decrease over the next two decades from the current level of 17.6% to be somewhat comparable to the 11.5% in Canada, France, and Germany; and (2) a projected increase in the enrollment among European health management programs for several reasons: (a) a huge spike in the demand for additional clinically oriented, health managers who can trade off concerns of cost versus quality; and (b) the constraints of most countries' statutory health insurance plans will become increasingly more evident so that privatization of healthcare services will become an option for those with above average incomes and, thereby, generate a demand for newly minted health managers similar to the US masters-level graduate.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".