MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799901534 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v10n6p10

Public Private Partnerships and Collaboration in the Health Sector in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: A Qualitative Study

2018· article· en· W2799901534 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic-Private Partnership Projects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivate sectorBusinessPublic–private partnershipGeneral partnershipPublic sectorService delivery frameworkGovernment (linguistics)Diversification (marketing strategy)Health carePublic relationsFinanceService (business)MarketingEconomic growthEconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A public-private partnership (PPP) is defined as a collaboration between the public and private sectors in the financing, delivery and development of public goods and services. This phenomenon has been adopted globally by many as a new economic paradigm. This study identifies challenges and other hindrances in promoting PPPs, identifies the concrete contribution of PPP initiatives in improving healthcare service delivery and determines the level of participation of the private sector in healthcare delivery systems under PPP initiatives in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 participants, including 4 government hospital directors, 5 private hospital directors and 4 health personnel. Participants were interviewed face to face, and the interviews were audio-recorded. The participants were purposefully selected based on their knowledge and familiarity with the implementation of PPP schemes. The evidence showed that the most important benefits of adopting a PPP are the quality of service, the speed at which low-cost healthcare service delivery is made accessible and the diversification of risks between the two sectors so that neither the private sector nor the public sector bears the entire risk alone. The results also revealed that PPPs will lead to increased efficiency and accuracy with respect to the design and implementation of infrastructural projects as well as the financing, execution, maintenance and development of the healthcare sector—the implementation of which makes high-quality services available to end users. Risk sharing is of great importance for the healthcare sector in that it helps hospitals to avoid closure and failure, distributes financial flows in an ideal way, and reduces the pressure on hospitals to work in a safe investment environment. This aim can be achieved through increasing the partnerships between public and private sectors.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.225 · 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