MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013125907 · doi:10.34069/ai/2020.27.03.39

Aspects of legal regulation of the provision of medical services

2020· article· en· W3013125907 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Amazonia Investiga · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Studies and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationLegalizationUkrainianBusinessConstitutionLegislatureLegal researchService (business)Human servicesHuman rightsPolitical scienceLawPublic relationsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article focuses on the need to respect human rights in the provision of medical services in Ukraine. It is strictly unacceptable to restrict citizens of Ukraine in receiving free medical services, since such a right is provided for by Art. 49 of the Constitution of Ukraine. It is proposed to consider that a medical service includes all types of medical care and is a special activity in relation to human health. The concept and main signs of medical services are revealed, it is established that the state, local governments, legal entities and individuals, including the patient, can be the customer of medical services. Ukrainian legislation governing the provision of medical services does not meet international standards. The positive experience of the EU countries (France, Denmark, Slovakia) and the world (Australia, Canada) shows that access to medical services is provided within the framework of medical insurance, in most cases free of charge, and is controlled by authorized state organizations. The purpose of the article is to determine the content, signs of medical services, classification criteria for their subjects, disclose the features of their legal regulation, clarify the problems of legalization of medical services and improve legislation taking into account foreign experience. The research methodology is based on a systematic approach, which is determined by the specifics of the topic of the article, and is also associated with the use of general and special research methods. The comparative legal method and the method of legal analysis were used in the study of legislative rules governing the provision of medical services. Using the method of legal analysis, groups of subjects of medical legal relations in the field of medical services are determined and their powers are analyzed. The formal logical method was used to differentiate the criteria for distinguishing between the legal structures “medical care” and “medical service”. The results of the study contributed to the identification of certain legal problems that arise when citizens receive medical services and require immediate resolution. It is also advisable to introduce compulsory state health insurance.

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.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.257 · 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