MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913275571 · doi:10.7454/eki.v3i1.2408

Risk Adjustment of Capitation Payment System: What Can Indonesia Adopt from other Countries?

2019· article· en· W2913275571 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Asri Hikmatuz Zahroh, Rizki Asriani Putri, Latanza Shima, Erdayani Erdayani, Rira Martaliza, Tri Priyo Anggoro, Wulansari Wulansari

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Ekonomi Kesehatan Indonesia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapitationScopusPaymentActuarial scienceBusinessPolitical scienceMEDLINEFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractCapitation calculation in Indonesia is not adjusted by individual and aggregate risk. Without risk adjustment, capitation ratesare likely to overpay or underpay primary care. This study aimed to review risk-adjusted capitation payment in other countriesfor evaluation of capitation payment system in Indonesia. The conduct and reporting of this systematic review followedthe recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). This studyused comprehensive electronic search in five databases: Pubmed, Proquest, Scopus, PMC, and EBSCOHost. Search resultsfrom five databases in April 2018, yielded a total 19 titles that will continue to review the full article and at the end, 4 articlesincluded for systematic review. Based on risk adjustment of capitation payment system in UK, USA, Canada and Sweden,Indonesia may initiate the use of risk adjustment based on the distribution of age and sex. Then Indonesia can develop riskadjustment based on diagnosis and socioeconomic factors to create more fair and accurate capitation rates for primary care.AbstrakPerhitungan kapitasi di Indonesia belum disesuaikan berdasarkan risiko individu dan agregat. Tanpa penyesuaian risiko, rate kapitasicenderung untuk membayar lebih atau kurang fasilitas kesehatan tingkat pertama. Studi ini bertujuan untuk meninjau sistem pembayarankapitasi di negara lain sebagai dasar evaluasi untuk sistem pembayaran kapitasi di Indonesia Penyusunan systematic review inimenggunakan rekomendasi dari Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Studi ini mengumpulkanartikel dari lima database yaitu: Pubmed, Proquest, Scopus, PMC, and EBSCOHost. Hasil pencarian dari lima database padabulan April 2018, didapatkan 19 judul artikel yang akan dilanjutkan untuk ditinjau secara menyuluruh, dan akhirnya didapatkan 4artikel yang akan diikutsertakan dalam systematic review. Berdasarkan penyesuaian risiko sistem pembayaran kapitasi di UK, USA,Canada dan Swedia, Indonesia dapat memulai sistem pembayaran kapitasi berdasarkan penyesuiaan distribusi umur dan jenis kelamin.Selanjutnya Indonesia dapat mengembangkan sistem pembayaran kapitasi berdasarkan diagnosis dan sosioekonomi untukmenciptakan rate kapitasi yang lebih adil dan akurat untuk fasilitas kesehatan tingkat pertama.

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)0.062
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.174
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0620.174
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Ekonomi Kesehatan IndonesiaSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207