In class exercise 2/6 --> 2/8

An analysis of four different research studies about my topic: Universal Health Care. Each article found should be a different type of study as defined by (Aveyard 2014) and in class (google doc).
How do you reference this journal in an APA work cited? Martin, D. P., Diehr, P., Price, K. F., & Richardson, W. C. (1989). Effect of a gatekeeper plan on health services use and charges: a randomized trial. American Journal of Public Health, 79(12), 1628–1632. What method is being used? RCT, random clinical trial How do the authors use the method? What do they use it for? What specifically does the method enable them to do? Why did they choose this method rather than another? What was it about this research agenda/topic that led them to choose this particular method? Answer a handful of these. They all get at similar thing. But I want blocks of texts. The authors wanted to test two different types of healthcare plans to determine which is more beneficial to Americans and HealthCare as a whole. They used on with a physician as a "gatekeeper". The UHC plan is with a "gatekeeper" while the alternative is without. Participants on both trials were randomized to ensure no bias occurred. This method allows researchers to test the amount of referrals, hospitalizations, money spent, quality of care, and patient attitudes towards coverage, amongst many others. They chose this method to see if UHC would be plausible in the US. By this I mean, if using a gatekeeper forces more Americans to go to hospitals and get procedures, instead of a UHC with a gatekeeper plans to lessen after-care and instead focus on preventative care. What is the conclusion of the study? And how did the method enable them to reach that particular conclusion? What was one interesting thing you discovered by leafing through this article? The Universal Health Care system showed $21 less/per person per year than a plan with no gatekeeper. This was because there were penalties and incentives for patients and .3 fewer visits to specialists. Essentially, UHC cuts out the middle man and focuses on controlling problems as they arise instead of waiting for it to become more of a problem. This RCT structure allowed researchers to properly compare and contrast both types of care. The most interesting thing I discovered by reading this article was that enrollees were more happy with a no gatekeeper plan even though it costed more money than the UHC plan.
How do you reference this journal in an APA work cited? Paul, H. (1957). Public Health Administration in the United States and England—Baltimore and Birmingham Compared. American Journal of Public Health and the Nations Health, 47(11 Pt 1), 1399–1404. What method is being used? cross-sectional How do the authors use the method? What do they use it for? What specifically does the method enable them to do? Why did they choose this method rather than another? What was it about this research agenda/topic that led them to choose this particular method? Answer a handful of these. They all get at similar thing. But I want blocks of texts. This was a little tricky for me to figure out but I ended up realizing that it is a cross-sectional study. It however, may fall between a few categories. I decided on the cross-sectional because it compares two different groups with many similarities to compare the healthcare systems and analyze if the system in one area could work in the other. They chose this method to see if the healthcare in one place (UHC) was able to be molded into a similar healthcare system that could work here in the US. They wanted to see if UHC is able to fit American needs. It was a very useful method in analyzing many aspects of the areas and what they see work in them. This is a very good step into figuring out how UHC might work in the US compared to how it is used in England. What is the conclusion of the study? And how did the method enable them to reach that particular conclusion? What was one interesting thing you discovered by leafing through this article? The study ultimately concluded that both systems worked for a variety of different reasons. It showed how each healthcare system fit accordingly to what the country needed and the technology and research each had. The conclusion was that there was really no difference in birth rates, death rates, education, etc. It was surprising to me how there weren't many differences in statistics but the forms of healthcare were so vastly different....
How do you reference this journal in an APA work cited? Akhter, M. N. (2003). APHA Policies on Universal Health Care: Health for a Few or Health for All? American Journal of Public Health, 93(1), 99–101. What method is being used? Policy Research How do the authors use the method? What do they use it for? What specifically does the method enable them to do? Why did they choose this method rather than another? What was it about this research agenda/topic that led them to choose this particular method? Answer a handful of these. They all get at similar thing. But I want blocks of texts. The author examines many policies that are current in today's healthcare system. The author also details what coverage is like for those insured and those uninsured. He demonstrates the need for UHC and what it can do for all Americans, really stressing the need for policy makers to finally adopt this system since there is such a growing need for more care. I believe change in the system led the author to use this type of research and it outline hard facts in current policy and calls for policymakers to implement a change to better fit citizens. By analyzing current policy the author was able to make a proposal with hardcore facts about current care and laws within it. What is the conclusion of the study? And how did the method enable them to reach that particular conclusion? What was one interesting thing you discovered by leafing through this article? The study concluded that the current US healthcare system is in a state of crisis and isn't growing to fit the needs of the society. The author proposes a way to build off current policies to ensure the health of all. He also wants to work with current stakeholders in public health so that it doesn't just benefit patients but insurances, providers, etc. The author wants to build off current policies instead of completely starting over and feels this will dramatically change our suffering healthcare system. The most surprising thing to me about this particular study was that almost every other country has already done this and has seen significant improvements in the health of their citizens.... what was also a huge surprise was that the author noted that the US current healthcare system is THE most expensive in the entire world yet fails to provide the most basic coverage to MILLIONS of citizens.
How do you reference this journal in an APA work cited? Shaffer, E. R. (2003). Universal Coverage and Public Health: New State Studies. American Journal of Public Health, 93(1), 109–111. What method is being used? Practice How do the authors use the method? What do they use it for? What specifically does the method enable them to do? Why did they choose this method rather than another? What was it about this research agenda/topic that led them to choose this particular method? Answer a handful of these. They all get at similar thing. But I want blocks of texts. The authors are public health professionals writing about new studies of healthcare plans in the state of California. It allows them to study effective methods actually being used, and practiced and assess their effectiveness. It also enables them to use their studies to see if it would work on a more broad area like the US as a whole. The authors have expertise in their fields and are able to properly analyze systems put in place to hopefully be able to implement their findings within the system. From practice literature, you can see what works and what doesn't. From that information you can either carry it out or tweak it to fit your area's needs for a more customizable healthcare plan/system. What is the conclusion of the study? And how did the method enable them to reach that particular conclusion? What was one interesting thing you discovered by leafing through this article? The study concluded that the current healthcare system was simply not working in California, the area of study, where there are more uninsured people than anywhere else. It concluded that new steps needed to be in place to change this and cover more patients. It also noted that it was very important to have more educational outreach programs and mend the relationships between provider/patient. I think the most shocking thing in this article was the fact that if California revamped its health care system, included educational programs, drew on others' policies, and expanded coverage for many citizens, it could save 4.6 billion dollars in the first year just by converting failing private institutions to a public status!