MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966744389 · doi:10.1016/j.vhri.2019.07.001

Tackling the 3 Big Challenges Confronting Health Technology Assessment Development in Asia: A Commentary

2019· article· en· W2966744389 on OpenAlexaff
Yot Teerawattananon, Yik Ying Teo, Saudamini Vishwanath Dabak, Waranya Rattanavipapong, Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai, Hwee Lin Wee, Nan Luo, Alec Morton

Bibliographic record

VenueValue in Health Regional Issues · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersDepartment for International Development, UK GovernmentNational University of SingaporeThailand Research FundRockefeller FoundationDepartment for International DevelopmentBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsReimbursementHealth technologyHealth carePolitical scienceMedicineEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been continuous development in the field of health technology assessment (HTA) owing to the added value of HTA in supporting healthcare reimbursement decisions. Collaboration and engagement among countries in Asia has been carried out to share experiences and learning on the barriers and factors facilitating the implementation and use of HTA in policy making. A symposium on the topic of Health Technology Assessment (HTA): Selecting the Highest Value Care was held on January 10, 2019 at the National University of Singapore, during which 3 major challenges confronting HTA development in Asia were identified. The symposium also offered possible ways to overcome the challenges.

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)0.076
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.209
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0760.209
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0060.016
Scholarly communication0.0130.023
Open science0.0080.009
Research integrity0.0500.066
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.429
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.040 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreCommentary

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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueValue in Health Regional IssuesSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207