MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2319400755 · doi:10.1177/1715163514562768

The Health Action Lobby releases its pre-election health platform

2014· article· en· W2319400755 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jeff Morrison

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Political sciencePublic relationsBusinessPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Pharmacists Association (CPhA) is a leading organization within the Health Action Lobby (HEAL), a coalition of 40 national health care organizations with a mandate to represent the collective interests of the health community with the federal government. In December, HEAL released its health care platform for federal political parties in advance of the next federal election. With a federal election expected in October 2015, HEAL has been working for the past 2 years to develop a set of recommendations aimed at strengthening the Canadian health care system. CPhA has been at the forefront in the development of the recommendations. The platform identifies steps that could be taken by the federal government to accelerate the pace of innovation, meet the changing health needs of Canadians, strengthen strategic partnerships with the provinces and territories and improve the health of Canadians and the care they receive. To meet these objectives, the HEAL platform identifies 6 key themes: Although HEAL recognizes that health care is delivered by provinces and territories, given the federal government’s own responsibilities in health, including the fact that it is the fifth largest health delivery body and a significant funder, the federal government needs to work more collaboratively with provinces and territories. Federal participation at the Council of the Federation’s Health Care Innovation Working Group would be a good first step. Greater clarity is needed with regard to the role of the federal government. HEAL has developed a vision statement that should guide future federal policy making in health care. A series of principles to transform the health system have been included in the platform, based on the work of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement and the Triple Aim approach. HEAL believes that federal funding for health care should reflect the Romanow Commission’s goal of 25% of total cost, up from its current level of approximately 20%. To more equitably distribute federal funds, HEAL is also recommending a Demographic Top-Up Fund that would reflect provinces/territories with older populations requiring greater health care assistance. HEAL believes the federal government can play a more direct role in 3 key areas: Canada’s aging population—HEAL would like a national dialogue on how to help Canadians finance the costs associated with aging. HEAL is also proposing a National Community-Based Health Infrastructure Fund to ensure an adequate supply of nursing home and long-term care beds. Access to prescription drugs—HEAL has adopted CPhA’s 2008 position on catastrophic drug coverage, which calls on the federal government to introduce a catastrophic drug insurance program that would prevent undue financial hardships in the event of exorbitant costs for medicines. Accelerating the spread of innovation—HEAL is proposing the creation of a National Health Innovation Fund that could accelerate the adoption of innovative practices in primary care, mental health and addictions, and health human resources. The federal government needs to develop a set of pan-Canadian health system performance indicators that would be used by all jurisdictions. These indicators would provide Canadians and policy makers with a clearer picture of how health systems are performing in comparison to objectives. This platform is intended to provide political parties with the unified views and perspectives of the health community on ways the federal government can strengthen the health care system in Canada. In the lead-up to and during the next federal election, we encourage pharmacists, as integral members of the health care community, to attend all candidates’ debates, meet with your candidates in person or send them a note indicating your support for these ideas and asking where they stand on issues related to health care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.003
Scholarly communication0.0170.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0120.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0840.032

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada→Same topicCanadian Policy and Governance→French-language works237,207→