Impact of health spending on hospitalization rates in Baltic countries: a comparative analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study examines the association between healthcare indicators and hospitalization rates in three high-income European countries, namely Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, from 2015 to 2020. METHOD: We used a sex-stratified generalized additive model (GAM) to investigate the impact of select healthcare indicators on hospitalization rates, adjusted by general economic status-i.e., gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. RESULTS: Our findings indicate a consistent decline in hospitalization rates over time for all three countries. The proportion of health expenditure spent on hospitals, the number of physicians and nurses, and hospital beds were not statistically significantly associated with hospitalization rates. However, changes in the number of employed medical doctors per 10,000 population were statistically significantly associated with changes of hospitalization rates in the same direction, with the effect being stronger for males. Additionally, higher GDP per capita was associated with increased hospitalization rates for both males and females in all three countries and in all models. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between healthcare spending and declining hospitalization rates was not statistically significant, suggesting that the healthcare systems may be shifting towards primary care, outpatient care, and on prevention efforts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".