MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319047269 · doi:10.1080/00036846.2023.2166664

α-returns to scale with quasi-fixed inputs: an application to Québec hospitals

2023· article· en· W4319047269 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thomas Blavet, Pierre Ouellette, Stéphane Vigeant

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Economics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReturns to scaleEconomies of scaleProduction (economics)RestructuringScale (ratio)Unit (ring theory)EconomicsEconometricsData envelopment analysisFixed costOrder (exchange)ProductivityConvexitySet (abstract data type)Computer scienceMicroeconomicsStatisticsMathematicsFinancial economicsFinanceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on the determination and estimation of the optimal size of hospitals. To determine the optimal size of a production unit, we use the measurement of returns to scale (RTS) at the decision-making unit level. When the RTS are constant, the unit is deemed of optimal size as the average total cost is at its minimum. As we deal with public service in a non-market environment, we have to take into account the fact that hospitals may not operate efficiently. To estimate the required production frontier we adapt the α-returns to scale method (a DEA type algorithm compatible with non-convexity of the production set) to include quasi-fixed factors. This methodology is applied to Québec hospitals at different points in time in order to capture the effect of the restructuring of the public health system over the last three decades. We conclude that by relying more on larger institution the scale efficiency of the public system has increased. However, in spite of the large reduction in the number of small hospitals and their replacement by very large structures, the movement may have gone too far, as most of the large institutions tend to exhibits decreasing returns to scale.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.012

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied EconomicsSame topicEfficiency Analysis Using DEAFrench-language works237,207