MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129704037 · doi:10.26633/rpsp.2021.9

Vinculación de datos administrativos y su utilidad en salud pública: el caso de Ecuador

2021· article· es· W3129704037 on OpenAlexaff
Fadya Orozco, Santiago Guaygua, Danilo Hernán López Villacis, Fabián Muñoz, Marcelo L. Urquía

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Panamericana de Salud Pública · 2021
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Systems and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this article is to describe the characteristics of addressing the linkage of administrative databases and the uses of such linkages in public health research, and also to discuss the opportunities and challenges for implementation in Ecuador. The linkage of databases makes it possible to integrate a person's data that may be scattered across different subsectors such as health, education, justice, immigration, and social programs. It also facilitates research that can inform more efficient management of social and health programs and policies. The main advantages of using linked databases are: diversity of data, population coverage, stability over time, and lower cost in comparison to primary data collection. Despite the availability of tools to process, link, and analyze large data sets, there has been minimal use of this approach in Latin American countries. Ecuador is well positioned to implement this approach, due to compulsory use of a unique ID in health services delivery, which permits linkages with other national information systems. However, the country faces several cultural, technical, ethical, legal, and political challenges. To take advantage of its potential, Ecuador needs to develop a data governance strategy that includes standards for data access and data use, as well as mechanisms for data control and quality, greater investment in professional training in data use both within and beyond the health sector, and collaborations between government entities, universities, and civil society organizations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Panamericana de Salud PúblicaSame topicHealthcare Systems and ReformsFrench-language works237,207