MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7074671852

Integrating Health Services in Ontario Through Mergers and Centralization

2020· article· en· W7074671852 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentralisationModernization theoryHealth servicesAgency (philosophy)LegislatureHealth policyHealth care reformDecentralization
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On 18 April 2019, the Legislative Assembly of Ontario passed Bill 74, The People’s Health Care Act, which provided new authorities to the Ministry of Health and a newly created Ontario Health super agency to facilitate the integration of health care services across Ontario. This reform represents a shift away from the previous regionalized system of Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs). While centralization is intended to improve efficiency within the system and create a patient-centred model of care, it also equips the Ministry and Ontario Health with greater authority over health agencies. Ontario’s reform represents another move towards centralization in a wave of regionalization reversal that has swept across the country. Implementation of this reform will take several years to roll out. An analysis of centralization reforms in other jurisdictions can provide insight into Ontario’s decision to reform. Though this bill was presented as a modernization of Ontario’s health system to meet people’s needs, a common theme in stakeholders’ opinions is the lack of consultation with the public. Le 18 avril 2019, l’Assemblée Législative de l’Ontario a mis voté le projet de loi 74, sur les soins de santé pour la population, conférant de nouveaux pouvoirs au Ministère de la Santé et à une toute nouvelle Agence Ontarienne de la Santé pour faciliter l’intégration des services de santé en Ontario. Cette réforme vient remplacer le précédent système régionalisé de réseaux locaux d’intégration des services de santé. Bien que la centralisation vise à améliorer l’efficacité au sein du système et à créer un modèle de soins axé sur le patient, elle confère également au Ministère et à Santé Ontario une plus grande autorité sur les organismes de santé. La réforme de l’Ontario représente un autre pas vers la centralisation suivant la vague d’inversion de la régionalisation partout au pays. La mise en oeuvre de cette réforme se fera sur plusieurs années. Une analyse des réformes de centralisation dans d’autres juridictions peut donner une décision de l’Ontario de se réformer. Malgré le fait que ce projet de loi soit présenté comme une modernisation du système de santé de l’Ontario pour répondre aux besoins des citoyens, les parties prenantes partagent un thème commun dans leurs opinions: le manque de consultation du public.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.138
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207