MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6982543398

International Healthcare Systems and the US Health Reform Debate

2017· other· en· W6982543398 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueIssue Lab (Candid) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepealHealth careHealthcare systemPoliticsHealth care reformHealth insuranceHealth reformPatient Protection and Affordable Care ActHealthcare policyHealth policy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ongoing challenges within the US healthcare system include its high costs, uneven access, and tremendous complexity. These deficits regularly generate calls for full-scale health reform from both sides of the political aisle. Republicans in Washington DC have consistently proposed to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and replace it with a less regulated system; most progressives in California would like to do away with the ACA in favor of "single-payer" healthcare modeled on the Canadian system. When considering the desirability of reforms, whether they come from the right or the left, it makes sense to look at how other developed countries are tackling their own healthcare challenges.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0110.016
Scholarly communication0.0200.010
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0190.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.003

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIssue Lab (Candid)French-language works237,207