MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561926548 · doi:10.1097/phh.0000000000000481

State-Level Surveillance of Underinsurance and Health Care-Related Financial Burden

2016· article· en· W2561926548 on OpenAlexaff
Dora M. Dumont, Junhie Oh, Tara Cooper

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Health Management and Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsDr. Georges-L.-Dumont University Hospital Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderinsuredHealth careBankruptcyBusinessMedicaidDebtMedicineHealth insuranceEnvironmental healthFinanceEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has reduced uninsurance, but underinsurance, health care-related financial burden, and dental uninsurance may not follow suit. Underinsurance is associated with reduced access to care, household debt, and bankruptcy but has been difficult to track without economic data. METHODS: We used readily available state-level survey data to build a model that states can adopt to implement surveillance over underinsurance and health care-related financial burden, as well as assess related disparities and health profiles. RESULTS: The state prevalence of underinsurance and dental uninsurance did not change in the first year of the ACA's individual mandate. Underinsurance was associated with poorer health-related quality-of-life measures: compared with the fully insured, underinsured adults had an adjusted odds ratio of 2.40 (95% CI, 1.71-3.38) of fair or poor general health. CONCLUSION: Tracking underinsurance and medical debt can help public health and health care access stakeholders evaluate which mechanisms (deductibles, co-pays, uncovered services, or is proportionately priced health care services and products) are barriers to care and improved health outcomes.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.153
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public Health Management and PracticeSame topicHealthcare Policy and ManagementFrench-language works237,207