MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294225690 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.170502

The Effect of Health Expenditure on Life Expectancy

2022· article· en· W4294225690 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fisnik Morina, Ajshe Komoni, Duresa Kilaj, Durim Selmonaj, Simon Grima

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife expectancyEconomicsPer capitaEconometricsPopulationProductivityRegression analysisPanel dataDemographic economicsDemographyEnvironmental healthEconomic growthStatisticsMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With this paper, we aim to analyse the effect of health expenditures and funding on the national life expectancy of OECD countries. We considered the influence of exogenous factors such as health expenditure, GDP per capita and productivity, population, infant mortality rates, potential years of life lost, deaths from cancer and the suicide rate. We used secondary data gathered between 2005 to 2018 from the annual reports of the OECD, the IMF and the World Bank. To derive the empirical results, econometric models such as linear regression, random effect, fixed effect, Hausman - Taylor Regression, GMM Model - Arellano Bond Estimation, Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE Model) and linear trend analysis through the historical and comparative method were used. Results show that health expenditures positively affect the national life expectancy of OECD countries, showing the impact and causality of national longevity in OECD countries.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207