MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The 2022 restructure of Aotearoa New Zealand's health system: Will it succeed in advancing equity where others have failed?

2023· article· en· W4378832535 on OpenAlexaff
Tim Tenbensel, Jacqueline Cumming, Esther Willing

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Policy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Services and Policy Research
FundersEuropean Observatory on Health Systems and Policies
KeywordsAotearoaTreaty of WaitangiEconomic growthWorkforceHealth policyPopulation healthHealth equityPopulationGovernment (linguistics)Equity (law)BusinessSocial determinants of healthContext (archaeology)IndigenousPolitical scienceHealth carePublic relationsMedicineEnvironmental healthGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aotearoa New Zealand has restructured its health system with the objective of addressing inequitable access to health services and inequitable health outcomes, particularly those affecting the indigenous Māori population. In July 2022, two new organisations were created to centralise planning, funding and provision responsibilities for publicly funded health services in Aotearoa New Zealand. Health New Zealand and the Māori Health Authority have been created to drive transformational change within the national health system and monitor and improve the health and wellbeing of Māori. At the local level, new Localities are to be formed with the aim of integrating services between government and non-government health and social services providers, while incorporating local Māori and local communities in co-design of services. These changes will be of interest to those in many other countries who are grappling with their own colonial histories and struggling to provide health services in ways that are equitable and contribute to positive health outcomes for their whole population. Although key aspects of the reforms are well supported within the health sector, the ambitious scope and timing of their introduction in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and health workforce shortages can be expected to generate significant implementation challenges.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0110.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.429 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations26
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth PolicySame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207