PERBANDINGAN SISTEM KESEHATAN DI NEGARA MAJU DAN NEGARA BERKEMBANG
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background: The health sistem is an action effort with the main objective being to promote, restore or maintain one's health. More than 8 million people per year in developing countries and poor countries, die from conditions that can basically be prevented by the health sistem. 60% of deaths are due to conditions that can be prevented by health care. Research objective: This study compares health sistems in five developing countries, namely China, India, Ghana, Mexico, South Africa and five developed countries, namely Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom and United States. The variables being compared are in terms of Health Services, Access, Health Financing, Communication of Doctors and Patients, Prevention and Promotion of Health Method: The method used in this research is Literature Review. Results: There are striking differences between the health sistem in developed and developing countries. The problem of primary health care in developing countries is the slow process of health care. In developing countries the use of access is hampered due to the distance traveled, the use of access has not been optimal, and the use of access according to regulations is still not optimal by officers, while in developed countries the problem that occurs is the difficulty of getting an agreement with a doctor especially after working hours due to busy busyness. Prevention and health promotion efforts in developed countries are better done than developing countries which are more curative than preventive Conclusion: Indeed, there are significant gaps in the health sistem in developed and developing countries. To overcome this gap, the world health program in developing sustainable goals must get the full support of all countries to create a health sistem that is able to overcome various health problems without any gaps. Keyword: Health Sistem, Comparison of developed and developing countries ABSTRAK Latar Belakang: Sistem kesehatan adalah upaya tindakan dengan tujuan utamanya adalah mempromosikan, memulihkan atau menjaga kesehatan seseorang. Lebih dari 8 juta orang pertahun di negara berkembang dan negara miskin, meninggal akibat kondisi yang pada dasarnya dapat dicegah dengan sistem kesehatan. Sebesar 60% kematian akibat dari kondisi yang dapat dicegah oleh perawatan ksehatan. Tujuan penelitian: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk membandingkan sistem kesehatan yang ada di lima Negara Berkembang yaitu China, India, Ghana, Mexico, Afrika Selatan dan lima Negara Maju yaitu Australia, Kanada, New Zealand, United Kingdom dan United States. Adapun variabel yang dibandingkan adalah dari segi Pelayanan Kesehatan, Akses, Pembiayaan Kesehatan, Komunikasi dokter dan Pasien, Pencegahan dan Promosi Kesehatan. Metode: Metode yang digunakan pada penelitian ini adalah Literatur Review. Hasil dan pembahasan: Ada perbedaan menonjol antara sistem kesehatan di negara maju dan negara berkembang. Permasalahan pelayanan kesehatan primer di negara berkembang adalah lambatnya proses pelayanan kesehatan. Di negara berkembang pemanfaatan akses terhambat dikarenakan jauhnya jarak tempuh, belum optimalnya pemanfaatan akses, dan penggunaan akses sesuai regulasi yang masih belum optimal oleh petugas, sementara di negara maju permasalahan yang terjadi adalah sulitnya mendapat perjanjian dengan dokter terutama setelah jam kerja dikarenakan kesibukan yang padat. Upaya pencegahan dan promosi kesehatan di negara maju sudah lebih baik dilakukan dibandingkan negara berkembang yang lebih ke kuratif daripada preventif. Kesimpulan: Memang terdapat kesenjangan atau gap yang cukup besar tentang sistem kesehatan di negara maju dan berkembang. Untuk mengatasi kesenjangan ini, program kesehatan dunia dalam development sustainable goals, harus lah mendapatkan dukungan penuh dari seluruh negara, untuk menciptakan sistem kesehatan yang mampu mengatasi berbagai masalah kesehatan tanpa adanya kesenjangan. Kata kunci: Sistem Kesehatan, Perbandingan negara maju dan berkembang
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".