A Spatio-Temporal Analysis of OECD Member Countries’ Health Care Systems: Effects of Data Missingness and Geographically and Temporally Weighted Regression on Inference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determinants of health care quality and efficiency are of importance to researchers, policy-makers, and public health officials as they allow for improved human capital and resource allocation as well as long-term fiscal planning. Statistical analyses used to understand determinants have neglected to explicitly discuss how missing data are handled, and consequently, previous research has been limited in inferential capability. We study OECD health care data and highlight the importance of transparency in the assumptions grounding the treatment of data missingness. Attention is drawn to the variation in ordinary least squares coefficient estimates and performance resulting from different imputation methods, and how this variation can undermine statistical inference. We also suggest that parametric regression models used previously are limited and potentially ill-suited for analysis of OECD data due to the inability to deal with both spatial and temporal autocorrelation. We propose the use of an alternative method in geographically and temporally weighted regression. A spatio-temporal analysis of health care system efficiency and quality of care across OECD member countries is performed using four proxy variables. Through a forward selection procedure, medical imaging equipment in a country is identified as a key determinant of quality of care and health outcomes, while government and compulsory health insurance expenditure per capita is identified as a key determinant of health care system efficiency.
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 | 0.015 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".