MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892006896 · doi:10.1177/0020731418793106

Neoliberalism and Accountability Failure in the Delivery of Services Affecting the Health of the Public

2018· article· en· W2892006896 on OpenAlexafffundabout
John Church, Amy Gerlock, Donna L. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Health Services · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsAccountabilityNeoliberalism (international relations)Corporate governanceGovernment (linguistics)Public administrationGovernment failurePolitical scienceSociologyBusinessPublic relationsPolitical economyFinanceLawPublic finance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the 1980s, the emergence of neoliberalism as a dominant government paradigm has led to increasing instances of accountability failure, resulting in significant injuries or death. Employing a grounded theory approach, accountability failure is defined and explored through analysis of 18 public inquiries and reports in the United Kingdom and Canada. The analysis reveals that the combination of a neoliberal policy paradigm and flawed regulation, governance, culture, and performance management inevitably led to accountability failure. Neoliberal policies have precipitated uncoordinated and underfunded regulatory regimes, an oppressive culture focused on financial efficiency at the expense of quality, self-serving and willfully blind governance, and underfunded and inadequate tools for measuring performance. The evidence suggests that organizations have not learned from each other within or between countries, revealing a pattern of accountability failure in which citizens are placed at risk in their communities and hospitals for preventable injury or death within an increasingly politicized government and leadership environment.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.406 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Health ServicesSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207