Federalism and Health Care in Canada: A Troubled Romance?
2017
- 2,761Usage
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage2,761
- Downloads2,568
- 2,568
- Abstract Views193
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- 1
Most Recent News
Worker Power Is the Only Solution to Canada’s Health Care Nightmare
By Madeleine Ritts In Canada, understaffed ERs, crumbling hospitals, and a government playing Russian roulette with public health have become the norm. At this critical
Paper Description
Canadian federalism fragments health system governance Although the Constitution has been interpreted as providing shared jurisdiction over health generally with respect to health care specifically the courts have interpreted the Constitution as giving direct jurisdiction to the provinces The Federal role in health care is therefore indirect but nevertheless potentially powerful For example the Federal government has used its spending powers to establish the Canada Health Act CHA which commits funding to provinces on condition they provide firstdollar public coverage of hospital and physician services However in recent times as federal contributions have declined the CHA has been weakly enforced Further the failure to broaden the CHA to include prescription drugs dentistry and other important aspects of health care have contributed to Canada's abysmal record on aboriginal health and its increasingly poor rankings in international comparisons Progress requires enforcement of an adequately funded CHA national pharmacare and concerted action on aboriginal health It requires bolder federal action and a panCanadian approach to governance in which federalism again becomes a laboratory of experimentation including on health human resource planning drug utilization and safety health emergency readiness health technology assessment electronic health information systems and systemlevel quality assurance
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know