Los incentivos y actores de los Sistemas de Salud de Costa Rica, Estados Unidos, Canadá, Chile y Ecuador - 2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ResumenAnte los diferentes sistemas de salud propuestos en cada país surge la necesidad de analizar la participación de cada uno de los elementos que lo componen. Este análisis se realiza con el fin de identificar y analizar los actores que intervienen en los sistemas de salud, especialmente, el uso de incentivos y la relación intersectorial que entre estos existe. Para ello, se llevó a cabo un estudio cualitativo descriptivo, mediante una revisión bibliográfica de los sistemas implementados en Costa Rica, Estados Unidos, Canadá, Chile y Ecuador. Se tuvieron en cuenta dos factores: el sistema de salud, definido por la Organización Mundial de la Salud como la suma de todas las organizaciones, instituciones y recursos empleados, cuyo objetivo consiste en mejorar la salud. El segundo, los incentivos, que brindan una motivación a los trabajadores, mejorando sus expectativas frente al trabajo y la manera de ejecutarlo, favoreciendo el cumplimiento de metas establecidas por las empresas. Como resultado, se encontró que en los sistemas de salud expuestos, si bien existen similitudes en relación con su desarrollo e implementación, también hay profundas diferencias, en especial, en la participación de actores públicos y privados. Conclusión: los incentivos existentes en los sistemas de salud estudiados no tienen un enfoque estratégico que articule a los actores en pro de la salud y el bienestar de la población. AbstractBefore the different systems of health proposed in every country there arises the need to analyze the participation of each one of the elements that compose it. This analysis is realized in order identify and to analyze the actors who intervene in the systems of health, especially, the use of incentives and the intersectorial relation that between these exists. For it, there was carried out a qualitative descriptive study, by means of a bibliographical review of the systems implemented in Costa Rica, The United States, Canada, Chile and Ecuador. Two factors were born in mind: the system of health, defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) like the sum of all the organizations, institutions and used resources, which aim consists of improving the health. The second one, the incentives, that offer a motivation to the workers, improving his expectations opposite to the work and the way of executing it, favoring the fulfillment of goals established by the companies. As result, one found that, in the systems of health exposed, though similarities exist in relation with his development and implementation, also there are deep differences, especially, in the participation of public and private actors. Conclusion, incentives in health care systems do not have strategic perspective so that there are many problems to obtain wellbeing for all citizens.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".