MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125294814

The Incidence of High Medical Expenses by Health Status in Seven Developed Countries

2016· preprint· en· W3125294814 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katherine Baird

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Washington Tacoma Digital Commons (University of Washington Tacoma) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical expensesQuarter (Canadian coin)Health careBusinessCost sharingSocial determinants of healthDemographic economicsPublic economicsEnvironmental healthEconomic growthMedicineEconomicsNursingGeographyMedical emergency
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health care policy seeks to ensure that citizens are protected against excessive out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses. Yet rising health care costs are pressuring private and social insurance schemes to shift toward more cost-sharing measures. This paper uses household surveys from seven countries to measure the burden of health expenditures for individuals with similar health conditions. It compares countries based on the extent to which citizens - those with health problems in particular - devote a large share of their income to medical expenses. The paper finds that in all countries but France, and to a lesser extent Slovenia, unhealthy citizens face considerably higher medical costs than do the healthy. As many as one-quarter of less healthy citizens in the U.S., Poland, Russia and Israel have large OOP expenses. The paper finds increased exposure to high medical expenses within countries is also associated with increased disparities between the unhealthy and healthy in the financial burden of OOP costs. The levels of high OOP spending uncovered, and their disparate weight on those with health problems (who are also disproportionately poor and elderly) underscore the potential for high OOP expenses to undermine core objectives of health care systems, including those of equitable financing, equal access, and improved medical outcomes.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.284 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Washington Tacoma Digital Commons (University of Washington Tacoma)Same topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207