MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995990794 · doi:10.6000/1929-7092.2019.08.75

Diagnosing The Dynamic Drivers of Healthcare Expenditure in Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Countries

2019· article· en· W2995990794 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdul Azeez Oluwanisola Abdul Wahab, Nurhazirah Hashim, Zurina Kefeli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reviews on Global Economics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careLife expectancyBusinessPer capitaExpectancy theoryPopulationPer capita incomeEmpirical researchPaymentGoods and servicesDemographic economicsEconomicsPublic economicsEconomic growthEconomyFinanceEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The foremost impact of healthcare system is for the individuals to have the right and privileges to access enhanced healthcare services. The demand for health, innovation and sustainable healthcare systems has also been gaining better prominence and consideration in numerous countries, and it is perceived as one of the major contributors to the economic growth and development. This paper looks at the dynamic drivers of healthcare expenditure in Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) countries from 1990 to 2015. The dynamic panel system Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) technique was used for the study analysis. The findings show that the income, life expectancy, share of population between the age group of 65 years and above, share of population age under 15 years, out-of-pocket payment, research and development (technology) in healthcare and consumer price index were the drivers of healthcare expenditure in OIC countries. In view of this, the study differs from recent and previous studies, because the study offers novel empirical findings as the income per capita is above one, which is about 1.90 and inelastic. This proves that healthcare in OIC countries is a luxury goods.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.368 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reviews on Global EconomicsSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207