MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2580724930 · doi:10.5539/jms.v7n1p1

Applying an Extended Kernel Density 4-Step Floating Catchment Area Method to Identify Priority Districts to Promote New Publicly Financed Supply of Gastroenterology Exams

2017· article· en· W2580724930 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pierre Polzin, José Borges, António Coelho

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Social Fund
KeywordsPortugueseInequalityCatchment areaBusinessOrder (exchange)Set (abstract data type)State (computer science)Promotion (chess)Environmental economicsEconomicsFinanceComputer scienceDrainage basinGeographyMathematicsLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In continental Portugal, the publicly financed supply of gastroenterology exams was limited since the end of the last century, restricted to a fixed set of private providers that was hired by the Portuguese state. This way of contracting created market entry barriers and is inefficient, since prices are administratively set. Besides, it produced access inequalities, because of the way that the supply was geographically distributed. This paper applies the Extended Kernel Density 4-Step Floating Catchment Area (EKD4SFCA) method to identify priority districts for the promotion of new supply by the state, in order to choose the appropriate way of contracting new private supply, as determined by current law, and to reduce access inequalities. The applied method enables the identification of the Portuguese regions with strong competition between health care providers and where patients’ access to publicly financed gastroenterology exams is relatively low. In these regions, the state should promote public bids to stimulate new supply, exploring thereby the potential for setting lower prices and reducing access inequalities.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicHealthcare Policy and ManagementFrench-language works237,207