MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173268607 · doi:10.3390/world2030022

Framework for Establishing a Sustainable Medical Facility: A Case Study of Medical Tourism in Jordan

2021· article· en· W3173268607 on OpenAlexaff
Durgham Darwazeh, Amelia Clarke, Jeffrey Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Healthcare and Medical Tourism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical tourismTourismSustainabilitySustainable developmentBusinessSustainable tourismMarketingEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A significant number of studies have assessed the impact of medical tourism from economic, technological and social perspectives. Few studies, however, have explored the development of the medical tourism sector from a sustainability perspective. This research brings a sustainability lens to medical tourism by extending Hart and Milstein’s framework (2003) for creating sustainable business value to advance the development of sustainable medical tourism facilities. To inform the analysis, the study conducted nine semi-structured interviews with members of the Jordan Medical Tourism Network (JMTN). Interview results confirmed the primary factors that motivate medical tourists, and characteristics of a sustainable medical tourism facility. The research provides insights on how sustainability is a driver of medical tourists’ decisions and a core aspect to be managed. The study also provides direction to advance sustainable medical tourism facilities in Jordan with replicability in other jurisdictions. The research proposes a path for medical tourism facilities to play further roles in their contribution to sustainable development by introducing a framework that aims to integrate four business strategies for establishing sustainable value through the integration of stakeholders’ interests and environmental practices.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.391 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations36
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorldSame topicGlobal Healthcare and Medical TourismFrench-language works237,207