MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403497040 · doi:10.3390/engproc2024076015

Analyzing the Challenges in the Healthcare System of Bangladesh

2024· article· en· W4403497040 on OpenAlexaff
M Habib, Golam Kabir

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Systems and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careComputer scienceHealthcare systemEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aims to comprehensively analyze the influential challenges within the healthcare system of Bangladesh using the DEMATEL–ISM-based Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) approach. The Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) methodology will be used to identify, evaluate, and prioritize challenges that have a notable impact on the efficiency and effectiveness of healthcare delivery in Bangladesh. The ISM methodology will help create hierarchical structures of challenges and explore the interdependencies among different factors. DEMATEL, a robust tool in decision science, will assist in understanding complex relationships among various criteria. Through this approach, this study intends to reveal the interconnections and causal relationships among different challenges, providing a systematic understanding of their impact on the healthcare system. Population growth was found to be the most challenging factor in the healthcare system of Bangladesh. The outcomes of this research are expected to contribute valuable insights to policymakers, healthcare practitioners, and stakeholders involved in the enhancement of the healthcare system in Bangladesh.

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)0.004
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealthcare Systems and ReformsFrench-language works237,207