MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Revisiting informal payments in 29 transitional countries: The scale and socio-economic correlates

2017· article· en· W2583191587 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Science & Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Systems and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOddsScale (ratio)Soviet unionGovernment (linguistics)Demographic economicsTransfer paymentPaymentOdds ratioSocioeconomicsDevelopment economicsDemographyGeographyEconomic growthEconomicsPolitical scienceLogistic regressionMedicineSociologyWelfarePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study assesses informal payments (IPs) in 29 transitional countries using a fully comparable household survey. The countries of the former Soviet Union, especially those in the Caucasus and Central Asia, exhibit the highest scale of IPs, followed by Southern Europe, and then Eastern Europe. The lowest and the highest scale of IPs were in Slovenia (2.7%) and Azerbaijan (73.9%) respectively. We found that being from a wealthier household, experiencing lower quality of healthcare in the form of long waiting times, lack of medicines, absence of personnel, and disrespectful treatment, and having relatives to help when needed, are associated with a higher odds ratio of IPs. Conversely, working for the government is associated with a lower odds ratio of IPs. Living in the countries of the former Soviet Union and in Mongolia is associated with the highest likelihood of IPs, and this is followed by the countries of the Southern Europe. In contrast, living in the countries of Eastern Europe is associated with the lowest likelihood of IPs.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.263 · 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