Integrating Public Health into Local Healthcare Governance in Quebec: Challenges in Combining Population and Organization Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The quest for greater efficiency in health systems encourages governments to bring together two fields of practice that have largely developed in parallel in industrialized countries: public health and healthcare. Current healthcare reform in the province of Quebec formally integrates these two fields within a common governance structure. The objective of this paper is to discuss the issues arising from the integration of public health services into the planning and delivery of local healthcare services, and its potential effect on the overall performance of the healthcare system. The authors begin by describing the characteristics of these two sectors; then, they discuss current reforms in Quebec and the impact of various transitions (epidemiological, technological and organizational) that bring the sectors into greater convergence. The paper concludes with a discussion of obstacles and potential opportunities at two levels: (a) the development of population-based planning of services within healthcare organizations, and (b) the articulation of public health and healthcare services concerns at the local level. The ongoing reform in Quebec is a unique opportunity to maximize outcomes from the resources invested in the healthcare system, based on a collective vision for improving health. This paper was originally published in French, in the journal Pratiques et organisation des soins 39(2): 113–24.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".