MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

OECD AND UKRAINE: TRENDS IN HEALTH CARE FINANCING

2023· article· en· W4386649049 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueМіжнародні відносини суспільні комунікації та регіональні студії · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Issues in Ukraine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careBusinessFinancePopulationDeveloped countryEconomic growthEconomicsMedicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article examines current trends in healthcare financing in OECD countries and Ukraine. The focus is on assessing the dynamics of total healthcare spending and it is found that in 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic caused a significant increase in funding in all countries. In particular, only in 2019-2020, the share of healthcare costs in the GDP of OECD countries increased by 1% on average. Thus, advanced countries, realizing the impact of the healthcare industry on the economy and well-being of the country as a whole, tried to maximally strengthen its financial stability in general and to epidemic challenges in particular. The priority sources of health care financing were analyzed and it was found that the governments of the OECD countries diversify the sources of financing in the sector to protect their citizens from excessive financial burden and to ensure affordable and high-quality medical care. It was found that the direct costs of patients from OECR countries account for an average of 20% of all health care costs, while in Ukraine the population finances more than 46% of medical costs. It was noted that this indicator is threatening for the country, since the poor do not have access to medical care due to lack of funds and, as a result, the number of diseases, the level of disability, and mortality of citizens is increasing. It was established that the priority sources of financing for one group of OECD countries (Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Great Britain, Canada, etc.) are budget funds, and for another (Germany, Japan, France, etc.) - funds from the mandatory health insurance system. In recent years, there has been a tendency to increase the share of mandatory health insurance in the structure of financing sources of OECD countries, which increased by 2% on average and amounted to 39%. It was concluded that the Ukrainian health care system, in which the reform began in 2015, annually increases the amount of funding and has positive feedback from WHO and World Bank experts about the results of the reform. However, due to political changes in 2014 and economic constraints due to the COVID-19 pandemic, total health spending in dollar terms in 2020 did not reach the 2013 funding level. In addition, the war made adjustments to the activity of the industry, introducing a regime of maximum preservation of infrastructure, simplification of financing, and ensuring the availability of medical services. Despite this, the government developed a post-war healthcare recovery plan to revive destroyed facilities and radically transform the industry in peacetime.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.233 · 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