MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7043816156

Unmet healthcare needs in Ireland. ESRI Research Bulletin 2016/06

2016· other· en· W7043816156 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueArchive of European Integration (AEI) (University of Pittsburgh) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsCanadian Bulletin of Medical History
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careHealth insurancePopulationPublic healthMedical carePublic health insuranceCover (algebra)Hospital carePrivate practicePrivate insurance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Relatively high user charges for GP consultations (for those without a medical/GP visit card) and long waits for public hospital services can act as barriers to accessing needed care in Ireland. However, there has been relatively little research on unmet healthcare needs in Ireland. In 2014, approximately 38 per cent of the population had a medical card, while 3.5 per cent had a GP visit card. Cardholders are eligible for GP care without fees and there has been previous evidence that non-cardholders may not visit a GP because of cost (O’Reilly et al. 2007). Approximately 42 per cent of the population hold private health insurance, which is mainly used to provide cover for private or semi-private acute hospital services, thereby avoiding potentially long waits for public hospital services. While those with a medical card can purchase private health insurance, the numbers doing so are relatively small. There is also a group of people without private health insurance and/or a medical card. This paper examines how these differing levels of cover for medical care may affect the experience of unmet need for care in Ireland.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.011

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchive of European Integration (AEI) (University of Pittsburgh)French-language works237,207