MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386034847 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-077783

For health or for profit? Understanding how private financing and for-profit delivery operate within Canadian healthcare (4H|4P): protocol for a multimethod knowledge mobilisation research project

2023· article· en· W4386034847 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lindsay Hedden, Sarah Spencer, Sara Allin, Damien Contandriopoulos, Frank Gavin, Agnes Grudniewicz, M. Ruth Lavergne, Chad Leaver, Joel Lexchin, Madeleine McKay, Maria Mathews, Rita McCracken, Kimberlyn McGrail, Karen S. Palmer, Marie-Ève Poitras, David Rudoler, Sheryl Spithoff, Meredith Vanstone

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityOntario Tech UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversité de SherbrookeWestern UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaNova Scotia HospitalYork UniversityConference Board of CanadaDalhousie UniversitySimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Victoria
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsMedicineHealth careProtocol (science)Not for profitHealthcare deliveryProfit (economics)Health care financingFor profitFinanceKnowledge managementAccountingAlternative medicineBusinessEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Privatisation through the expansion of private payment and investor-owned corporate healthcare delivery in Canada raises potential conflicts with equity principles on which Medicare (Canadian public health insurance) is founded. Some cases of privatisation are widely recognised, while others are evolving and more hidden, and their extent differs across provinces and territories likely due in part to variability in policies governing private payment (out-of-pocket payments and private insurance) and delivery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This pan-Canadian knowledge mobilisation project will collect, classify, analyse and interpret data about investor-owned privatisation of healthcare financing and delivery systems in Canada. Learnings from the project will be used to develop, test and refine a new conceptual framework that will describe public-private interfaces operating within Canada's healthcare system. In Phase I, we will conduct an environmental scan to: (1) document core policies that underpin public-private interfaces; and (2) describe new or emerging forms of investor-owned privatisation ('cases'). We will analyse data from the scan and use inductive content analysis with a pragmatic approach. In Phase II, we will convene a virtual policy workshop with subject matter experts to refine the findings from the environmental scan and, using an adapted James Lind Alliance Delphi process, prioritise health system sectors and/or services in need of in-depth research on the impacts of private financing and investor-owned delivery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We have obtained approval from the research ethics boards at Simon Fraser University, University of British Columbia and University of Victoria through Research Ethics British Columbia (H23-00612). Participants will provide written informed consent. In addition to traditional academic publications, study results will be summarised in a policy report and a series of targeted policy briefs distributed to workshop participants and decision/policymaking organisations across Canada. The prioritised list of cases will form the basis for future research projects that will investigate the impacts of investor-owned privatisation.

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)0.109
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.097
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1090.097
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0110.010
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.008

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 head0.810
GPT teacher head0.593
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreProtocol

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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicHealthcare Policy and Management→French-language works237,207→