MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2488797783 · doi:10.1057/9780230228771_12

New Political Legacies and the Politics of Health and Pension Re-reforms in Chile

2008· book-chapter· en· W2488797783 on OpenAlexaff
Christina Ewig, Stephen Kay

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPensionLatin AmericansPoliticsPolitical scienceHealth carePrivate pensionHealth care reformCompetition (biology)Public healthHealth policyEconomic policyPolitical economyPublic administrationEconomicsEconomic growthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chile was a pioneer in introducing market competition into its largely public-dominated health and pension systems. Numerous countries followed Chile’s lead in privatizing pension provision; US President George W. Bush looked to Chile’s pension reform as a model for the United States to follow. Chile’s health reforms were also pioneering in that it was the first Latin American country to introduce private health providers and insurers into a largely public health care system, inspiring similar market-based reforms across the Latin American region. Yet, despite international and regional leadership in health and pension reforms, Chileans themselves have been less than satisfied with the new market-based systems. This discontent has manifested in recent “re-reforms” of both health and pension policies in Chile during the 2000s. The democratically elected center-left governments of Ricardo Lagos and Michele Bachelet attempted to pass reforms in which the state would increase its oversight over these social policy areas and would compensate to a greater degree for market failures. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.014
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207