MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039643723 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v11n3p168

Takaful Protection for Mental Health Illness From the Perspective of Maqasid Shariah

2020· article· en· W3039643723 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khairil Faizal Khairi, Mohamad Subini Abdul Samat, Nur Hidayah Laili, Hisham Sabri, Mohd Yazis Ali Basah, Asmaddy Haris, Azrul Azlan Iskandar Mirza

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Sains Islam Malaysia
KeywordsHarmMental illnessMental healthPsychiatryPerspective (graphical)DiseaseMedicinePsychologyBusinessSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mental health illness becomes one of the major illnesses in Malaysia aside from heart disease. It was recently reported that 29.2% of Malaysians are suffering from mental health illness which increases threefold from the previous year. Majority of the Malaysians suffering from mental health illness comes from the lowest income group. This shows that the lowest income group has less opportunity to seek treatment due to the cost. Even though other countries have started to offer mental health insurance such as the United States of America, United Kingdom, Australia and recently Singapore, Malaysia is still way behind in offering coverage for mental health illness. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to study the mental health takaful from the perspective of Maqasid shariah. The results from this study show that mental health takaful is able to meet the requirement of Maqasid shariah and preserve the benefits of, and prevent harm to human wellbeing. Furthermore, this study will provide an insight to the takaful industry for developing new products that could help mental health disorder patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207