MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399998327 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17070260

Asymmetry in Cost Behavior in Brazilian Hospitals

2024· article· en· W4399998327 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. Silva, Tany Ingrid Sagredo Marin, Kátia Abbas, Luiz Eduardo Gaio, Carlos Alberto Grespan Bonacim, Rafael Confetti Gatsios

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsymmetryPsychologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Investigating if the proportion of fixed assets over total assets is positively associated with the asymmetric cost behavior of public and private hospitals in Brazil. Methods: In order to test the sticky cost phenomenon in a different sector of companies and industries, we used panel data regression to investigate the asymmetric cost behavior in Brazilian hospitals, analyzing the hospital cost behavior regarding the variation in revenues and verifying whether the proportion of fixed assets over total assets is positively associated with the asymmetric cost behavior. As a result, this research took the findings obtained by the models applied to data from the 101 hospitals comprising the sample, spread over the 2010–2019 period. The research was divided into four sections. The first section tested asymmetry for fixed assets over total assets for hospitals in general. The second section divided the sample into public and private hospitals. The third section analyzed the sample of conglomerates against a single hospital. Finally, the fourth section tested the asymmetry of the hospitals in the sample measured by the number of beds. Results: The evidence documented here partially confirms the results of literature on the existence of asymmetric cost behavior regarding variations in revenue. The H1 hypothesis that the proportion of fixed assets over total assets is positively associated with the asymmetric cost behavior was confirmed, especially for private and small hospitals regarding fixed assets.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207