Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the operational and management challenges in a globally budgeted, regionalized healthcare system and their implications for public service. Design/methodology/approach Concentrating on British Columbia's regional health authorities (RHAs) and hospitals, this study utilized data from interviews of key informants, documents (histories, legislation, agreements between RHAs and provincial government, and RHA organizational charts), news reports, and participant observation at board meetings. Findings Challenges encountered by the managers include accommodating powerful stakeholders (elected officials, providers, and organized publics), adhering to fixed budgets, obtaining capital from public sources, and adjusting to government turnover. In response, the managers engage in balancing priorities of stakeholders, shifting of resources within and across sites and operating units, and working strategically with the capital allocation process. Responses of managers to these challenges have promoted stability but raise concerns about attaining the system's goals. Practical implications Management challenges and potential patterns of response should be considered in assessing the options for health system reforms. Many countries periodically reorganize their healthcare systems, and recognition of potential management challenges can contribute to the achievement of objectives sought in these reforms. Originality/value Although studies have demonstrated that management affects the implementation of public programs in several areas, little research has focused on the relationships between features of health systems, management responses, and potential 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".