MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401645708 · doi:10.3390/jcdd11080250

Socioeconomic Status and Access to Care for Pediatric and Adult Congenital Heart Disease in Universal Health Coverage Models

2024· review· en· W4401645708 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusMedicineHeart diseaseHealth careDiseaseEnvironmental healthGerontologyPediatricsEconomic growthPopulationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Congenital heart disease (CHD) is the most common major congenital anomaly, affecting one in every 100 live births. Whereas over 90% of children born with CHD in low- and middle-income countries cannot access the care they need, early detection, advances in management, and financial risk protection have resulted in over 90% of children with CHD in high-income countries surviving into adulthood. Despite the presence of universal health coverage, barriers to accessing high-quality cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular care for CHD remain common. Lower socioeconomic status has been associated with differential access to cardiac care and poorer outcomes across multiple cardiovascular conditions and subspecialties. In this review article, we describe the relationship between socioeconomic status and access to CHD care in countries with universal health coverage models. We further evaluate notable challenges and opportunities to improve equitable, high-quality CHD care in these countries.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.287 · 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