Evaluating health systems’ efficiency towards universal health coverage: A data envelopment analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To estimate the technical efficiency of health systems toward achieving universal health coverage (UHC) in 191 countries. We applied an output-oriented data envelopment analysis approach to estimate the technical efficiency of the health systems, including the UHC index (a summary measure that captures both service coverage and financial protection) as the output variable and per capita health expenditure, doctors, nurses, and hospital bed density as input variables. We used a Tobit simple-censored regression with bootstrap analysis to observe the socioeconomic and environmental factors associated with efficiency estimates. The global UHC index improved from the 2019 estimates, ranged from 48.4 (Somalia) to 94.8 (Canada), with a mean of 76.9 (std. dev.: ±12.0). Approximately 78.5% (150 of 191) of the studied countries were inefficient (ϕ < 1.0) with respect to using health system resources toward achieving UHC. By improving health system efficiency, low-income, lower-middle-income, upper-middle-income, and high-income countries can improve their UHC indices by 4.6%, 5.5%, 6.8%, and 4.1%, respectively, by using their current resource levels. The percentage of health expenditure spent on primary health care (PHC), governance quality, and the passage of UHC legislation significantly influenced efficiency estimates. Our findings suggests health systems inefficiency toward achieving UHC persists across countries, regardless of their income classifications and WHO regions, as well as indicating that using current level of resources, most countries could boost their progress toward UHC by improving their health system efficiency by increasing investments in PHC, improving health system governance, and where applicable, enacting/implementing UHC legislation.
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 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 | 0.028 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".