MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399717248 · doi:10.1080/01559982.2024.2364955

Patient empowerment in public healthcare funding system reform: a power network perspective

2024· article· en· W4399717248 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting Forum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisadvantagedHealth careEmpowermentPosition (finance)Power (physics)Health care reformBusinessPublic relationsPerspective (graphical)SociologyEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomicsHealth policyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines a reform of the French healthcare system that aimed to empower patients and improve their access to care but led to various adverse consequences for patients. Specifically, already socio-economically disadvantaged groups of patients found their positions becoming even more precarious. Conceptually, we draw upon Emerson’s power dependence theory and find that, rather than empowering patients, the reform resulted in private health insurance providers emerging as critical actors and primary beneficiaries of power network changes. This healthcare system-level analysis highlights the need for patients to be the direct focus of healthcare system reform and the importance of considering their position within the power network for understanding reform outcomes. This attention to the power network adds to the extant theorisation on the effects of funding mechanism reform on the nature of patient empowerment and access to healthcare.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.237 · 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