Healthcare Systems and COVID-19 Mortality in Selected OECD Countries: A Panel Quantile Regression Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The pandemic caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has exerted an unprecedented impact on the health of populations worldwide. However, the adverse health consequences of the pandemic in terms of infection and mortality rates have varied across countries. In this study, we investigate whether COVID-19 mortality rates across a group of developed nations are associated with characteristics of their healthcare systems, beyond the differential policy responses in those countries. METHODS: To achieve the study objective, we distinguished healthcare systems based on the extent of healthcare decommodification. Using available daily data from 2020, 2021, and 2022, we applied quantile regression with non-additive fixed effects to estimate mortality rates across quantiles. Our analysis began prior to vaccine development (in 2020) and continued after the vaccines were introduced (throughout 2021 and part of 2022). RESULTS: The findings indicate that higher testing rates, coupled with more stringent containment and public health measures, had a significant negative impact on the death rate in both pre-vaccination and post-vaccination models. The data from the post-vaccination model demonstrate that higher vaccination rates were associated with significant decreases in fatalities. Additionally, our research indicates that countries with healthcare systems characterized by high and medium levels of decommodification experienced lower mortality rates than those with healthcare systems involving low decommodification. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that stronger public health infrastructure and more inclusive social protections have mitigated the severity of the pandemic's adverse health impacts, more so than emergency containment measures and social restrictions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".