Developing a Capsule Clinic—A 24-Hour Institution for Improving Primary Health Care Accessibility: Evidence From China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Telehealth is an effective combination of medical service and intelligent technology. It can improve the problem of remote access to medical care. However, an imbalance in the allocation of health resources still occurs. People spend more time and money to access higher-quality services, which results in inequitable access to primary health care (PHC). At the same time, patients' usage of telehealth services is limited by the equipment and their own knowledge, and the PHC service suffers from low usage efficiency and lack of service supply. Therefore, improving PHC accessibility is crucial to narrowing the global health care coverage gap and maintaining health equity. In recent years, China has explored several new approaches to improve PHC accessibility. One such approach is the capsule clinic, an emerging institution that represents an upgraded version of the internet hospital. In coordination with the United Nations, the Yinzhou district of Ningbo city in Zhejiang, China, has been testing this new model since 2020. As of October 2022, the number of applications in Ningbo was 15, and the number of users reached 12,219. Unlike internet hospitals, the entire process-from diagnosis to prescription services-can be completed at the capsule clinic. The 24-hour telehealth service could also solve transportation problems and save time for users. Big data analysis can accurately identify regional populations' PHC service needs and improve efficiency in health resource allocation. The user-friendly, low-cost, and easily accessible telehealth model is of great significance. Installation of capsule clinics would improve PHC accessibility and resolve the uneven distribution of health resources to promote health equity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".