MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221029992 · doi:10.12927/hcpol.2022.26727

Exploring Privatization in Canadian Primary Care: An Environmental Scan of Primary Care Clinics Accepting Private Payment

2022· article· en· W4221029992 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Aidan Bodner, Sarah Spencer, M. Ruth Lavergne, Lindsay Hedden

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare policy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityMichael Smith Health Research BCSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScrutinyPaymentPrimary careBusinessPayment by ResultsService (business)Thematic analysisTertiary careFamily medicineNursingMedicineMarketingPolitical scienceFinanceQualitative researchPublic administrationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Private payment within primary care has not received extensive scrutiny, despite the emergence of "concierge" primary care services.Objective: We conducted an environmental scan to explore the nature of private payment for primary care across Canada.Method: We extracted data from clinic websites on funding models, range of services provided and whether they were independent or part of a chain.We conducted a thematic analysis of service advertisements.Results: We identified 83 private clinics across six provinces, predominately in urban areas.Private payment-only clinics offered the widest range of services and advertisements emphasised timely, comprehensive care.Conclusion: The extent to which these clinics and bundling of primary care with privately paid wellness services impact patients' access to care should be the subject of future research. RésuméContexte : Le paiement privé dans le cadre des soins primaires n' a pas fait l' objet d' un examen minutieux, et ce, malgré l'émergence de services de soins primaires « de conciergerie ».Objectif : Nous avons effectué une analyse environnementale pour explorer la nature du paiement privé des soins primaires au Canada.Méthode : Nous avons extrait, à partir des sites Web des cliniques, des données sur les modèles de financement, sur la gamme de services fournis et sur le type de cliniques, à savoir si elles étaient indépendantes ou faisaient partie d' une chaîne.Nous avons procédé à une analyse thématique des annonces de services offerts.Résultats : Nous avons identifié 83 cliniques privées dans six provinces, principalement dans les zones urbaines.Les cliniques privées payantes offraient la plus large gamme de services et leurs annonces mettaient l' accent sur des soins complets et en temps opportun.Conclusion : La mesure dans laquelle ces cliniques et le regroupement des soins primaires avec des services de bien-être privés ont un impact sur l' accès des patients aux soins devrait faire l' objet de recherches futures.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.017
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare policySame topicHealthcare Policy and ManagementFrench-language works237,207