MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516359718 · doi:10.1080/15562948.2016.1214993

Ontario Healthcare Coverage Eligibility Among New Permanent Residents: A Scoping Review

2016· review· en· W2516359718 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrea Bobadilla, Treena Orchard, Lílian Magalhães, Deborah Fitzsimmons

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careGrey literaturePublic healthPeer reviewMedicineHealth policyHealthcare systemFamily medicineEnvironmental healthMEDLINENursingBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New permanent residents to Ontario can experience difficulties accessing health services due to the 3-month residency requirement for provincial healthcare coverage. This scoping literature review, which included peer-reviewed articles and gray literature from 1993–2013, examined the effects of the 3-month waiting period on the health of new permanent residents to Ontario, public health, and the health-care system. At the individual level, issues of affordability, pre-existing conditions, and quality of care were prominent throughout the literature. At a systems level, the policy was found to constrain various health-care settings, pose a risk to public health, and compound health-care system costs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.403 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Immigrant & Refugee StudiesSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207