Government Relations in the Health Care Industry
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
<JATS1:p>Leatt, Mapa, and their panel of scholars, practitioners, and policymakers provide compelling reasons why the development and maintenance of effective government relations in the health industry must be a top priority for health industry management. This book explores how U.S. health care policies are similar to those of Canada—an important insight and unusual new way to understand how government/health industry processes actually work. The authors prove that government relations strategies must be built into the organization's strategic plan. They provide ways to monitor and improve the relationship between one's own health facility and the government agencies that influence its activities and survival.</JATS1:p> <JATS1:p>Drawn from the public, private, and academic communities of the U.S. and Canada, the contributors to this wide-ranging volume conclude that the formation and implementation of health care policy is an essential component of any strategic planning process. Intended for top decision makers in the health industry, as well as for health policy makers throughout the public sector, this unique treatment of health care as a significant contemporary problem will also be of value to consumers, community groups, students, and anyone who demands a say in health policy and its implementation.</JATS1:p>
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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