MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400368226 · doi:10.1111/iere.12722

HEALTH, HEALTH INSURANCE, AND INEQUALITY

2024· article· en· W4400368226 on OpenAlexaff
Chaoran Chen, Zhigang Feng, Jiaying Gu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Economic Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife expectancyHealth insuranceInequalityHealth equityActuarial scienceRedistribution (election)Self-insuranceEconomicsDistribution (mathematics)Demographic economicsPublic economicsBusinessEnvironmental healthHealth careEconomic growthMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article identifies a “health premium” of insurance coverage: insured individuals are more likely to maintain good health or recover from poor health. We introduce this feature into a prototypical macrohealth model and estimate the baseline economy by matching the observed joint distribution of health insurance, health, and income over the life cycle. Quantitative analysis reveals that an individual's insurance status has a substantial and persistent impact on health. Providing universal health coverage would narrow health and life expectancy gaps, with a mixed effect on the income distribution in the absence of any additional redistribution of income or wealth.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient 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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.423 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Economic ReviewSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207