India's Healthcare Industry: Innovation in Healthcare Delivery, Financing, and Manufacturing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lawton Robert Burns, ed. India's Healthcare Industry: Innovation in Healthcare Delivery, Financing, and Manufacturing New Delhi, India: Cambridge University Press, 2014Lawton R. Burns is Chair of Department of Health Care Management at Wharton School at University of Pennsylvania. Professor Burns' background is in Sociology (PhD) and Health Administration (MBA), both from University of Chicago. His research preoccupations are with what is called supply chain (Burns, 2002) and innovation (Burns, 2012). He has also produced a substantial textbook (Burns, 2011). His overall focus is on healthcare from a business perspective.Burns' early contributions involved discussions of matters such as the strategies of group purchasing organizations and wholesaler/distributors, the role of e-commerce in care value chain, insights into hospital customer of future, and advice to health care executives to form alliances, increase their market power, and gain competitive advantage. He has continued in same vein (so to speak) as he has explained how best to form strategic alliances and partnerships ... between pharmaceutical firms/distributors, disposable manufacturers, medical device manufacturers, group purchasing organizations, and organized delivery systems. If he deals with healing at all, it most likely concerns proper managerial therapy to be applied when commercial facilities begin to bleed money.Dr. Burns is plainly good at what he does. His studies are read to advantage by investors, executives, managers and students of industry, a vast and growing field on a planet where population growth is arguably exceeding what environmentalists call Earth's carrying capacity. Every reasonable effort is being made to provide acute and chronic care to so many people that budgets in prosperous countries normally come close to 10% of Gross National Product and incessant demands for more resources are being made both in advanced and in underdeveloped countries. Add to this enthusiasm for high technology diagnostic and therapeutic devices at one end and imminent threat of pandemics at other, and it is easy to see that industry is prospering like few others.Burns is a successful contributor who has certainly provided invaluable advice to all who wish to get involved. For example, as a Visiting Professor at University of Wisconsin's Department of Preventative Medicine, he taught physicians about intricacies of corporate strategy. Few lessons could be more valuable. Indeed, he would probably not be insulted to carry title of unofficial guru to pharmaceutical-medical complex. In fact, it would not surprise me to learn that people who persuaded President Obama to drop prospect of a single-payer universal insurance system from his deliberations about American Affordable Care Act had been avid readers of Burns' books.In volume under review, Professor Burns has taken his expertise and applied it to very different circumstances than those experienced by most of his compatriots in domestic American healthcare industry. He examines conditions and possibilities for expansion in India as a vital new frontier for investment and profitable product delivery. There are evidently extraordinary opportunities for industry growth in this still poor, but potentially ever more powerful economy.Like generations of experts before him, main features of Burns' approach were developed in USA, but they are applied elsewhere under a general template for development that purports to be universal. So confident is he in his model for medical modernization that he is currently at work on a book that will examine situation in China and explain how to exploit openings there as well. According to Burns (Knowledge@Wharton, 2011), the trends in China are remarkably similar to what has happened to [healthcare] sector in India. …
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".