MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380270472 · doi:10.1515/9780228016335

The Boundaries of Medicare

2023· book· en· W4380270472 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katherine Fierlbeck, Gregory P. Marchildon

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill-Queen's University Press eBooks · 2023
Typebook
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While almost all universal health coverage in Canada is provided under the Canada Health Act, there is Medicare coverage that is provided outside of the act. This is the first book to explain the nature of these boundary health services, why they exist, and how to navigate them in practice. The Boundaries of Medicare examines the complex range of public health care services and coverage arrangements that predate or have developed alongside the Canada Health Act. These provisions – including for workers’ compensation, military personnel and veterans, incarcerated persons, migrants, and Indigenous Peoples – are often not well understood, even by those working at policy and delivery levels. Katherine Fierlbeck and Gregory Marchildon aim to improve understanding of these boundary services: why they were established, who is eligible for them, how services are provided, how they are paid for, and how they are managed within a multilevel governance system. They also look at the dramatic increase in virtual health care services since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and their relationship to the Canada Health Act. Explaining the origins, operations, and tensions of government-funded health care outside the Canada Health Act, The Boundaries of Medicare is an essential resource for policymakers, providers, administrators, and patients seeking to navigate Medicare in Canada.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.004

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill-Queen's University Press eBooksSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207