Regionalization and the Closure of 52 Hospitals in Rural Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the early 1990s Canada was in a recession and the government of Saskatchewan felt the pressure of a growing deficit. In 1992, the provincial government decided to reduce the health care budget by 3.3%. The following year, the government undertook regionalization of health care services through the Health Districts Act, with a focus on promoting preventative health care rather than solely treatment-based care. The budget cuts resulted in the closure of 52 rural hospitals, leading to a public outcry. Evaluations of the reform were not able to show a definite detrimental effect on health outcomes in the corresponding communities. Community members expressed increased caregiver burden, travel costs and travel time to the next nearest hospital, and potential inequalities in access to care. When undertaking reform, it is important that government consider the voices of local communities in the decision-making process. Au début des années 90, le Canada était en récession et, en Saskatchewan, le déficit budgétaire posait un problème pressant au gouvernement provincial. Celui-ci décida de réduire le budget de la santé de 3,3% en 1992. L’année suivante, le gouvernement mit en place une régionalisation des services de santé fondée sur la Loi sur les Districts de Santé, avec comme objectif de favoriser la prévention par rapport aux soins purement curatifs. 52 hôpitaux ruraux durent fermer à cause des coupes budgétaires, entraînant une réaction de rejet de la part du public. Les évaluations de la réforme n’ont pas pu établir avec certitude une détérioration de la santé dans les communautés concernées. Les habitants des communautés concernées ont exprimé une charge accrue pour les aidants, des coûts et temps de transports plus élevés pour se rendre à l’hôpital le plus proche, et d’éventuelles inégalités d’accès aux soins. Les voix des populations concernées devraient être écoutées lors de la prise de décision sur de telles réformes.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".