Performance measurement, financial reporting quality, and digitalization in the healthcare sector
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This editorial introduces a special issue that addresses emerging accounting research challenges in the healthcare sector, a domain whose societal and economic significance has become even more evident in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. The crisis exposed some weaknesses in cost-centric healthcare governance and underscored the need to re-evaluate accounting's role in supporting more resilient and equitable healthcare systems. This special issue brings together contributions that explore three interrelated themes central to this re-evaluation: performance measurement, financial reporting quality, and digitalization. Each theme reflects both longstanding concerns and new complexities brought to the fore by the pandemic. The selected papers offer insights into the limitations and consequences of existing accounting practices, as well as the opportunities presented by technological innovation and broader governance issues. Collectively, they underscore the need for accounting research to engage more deeply with healthcare's evolving organizational, political, and digital landscape.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it