Healthcare Inequality in the Digital 21st Century: The Case for a Mandate for Equal Access to Quality Medicine for All

Julia M. Puaschunder, D. Beerbaum
{"title":"Healthcare Inequality in the Digital 21st Century: The Case for a Mandate for Equal Access to Quality Medicine for All","authors":"Julia M. Puaschunder, D. Beerbaum","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3679342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The currently ongoing COVID-19 crisis challenges health around the world. Public and private sector healthcare provision differs between countries. On an interconnected globe with a highly mobile 21st century population and a most contagious virus, healthcare appears as internationally-interdependent as never before in the history of humankind. More than ever before pandemic precaution requires globally-carried solutions and risks management based on internationally-harmonized action. The endeavor of a commonly healthy world is challenged in light of the nowadays unprecedentedly-blatant healthcare inequality around the world. \n \nBased on macroeconomic modelling, our empirical research brought forward four indices shedding light on health inequality in the 21st digital century. International data on digitalization, economic prosperity, healthcare standards and innovation market financialization revealed that Europe and North America feature excellent starting positions on economic productivity and relatively low levels of corruption. Internet connectivity and high Gross Domestic Product are likely to lead on AI-driven big data insights for pandemic prevention, of which Europe, Asia and North America have optimal global healthcare leadership potential. Europe benefits from highest standards on public preventive medical care, while the United States has the most prosperous market financialization to advance medical innovations. Oceania performs well on general healthcare but has comparatively less international medical market power. Asia and the Gulf region are in the middle ranges of healthcare provision and market innovation financing but are critical on corruption, which also appears to hinder access to quality healthcare in South America. Africa ranks low on healthcare and raising funds for medical purposes in corruption-prone territories. \n \nThe currently ongoing COVID-19 crisis has created awareness for the global interconnectivity of healthcare but also heighted attention to the drastic medical standard differences around the world, which unprecedentedly leverages the sustainable development mandate to grant equal access to healthcare.","PeriodicalId":13563,"journal":{"name":"Insurance & Financing in Health Economics eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Insurance & Financing in Health Economics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3679342","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

The currently ongoing COVID-19 crisis challenges health around the world. Public and private sector healthcare provision differs between countries. On an interconnected globe with a highly mobile 21st century population and a most contagious virus, healthcare appears as internationally-interdependent as never before in the history of humankind. More than ever before pandemic precaution requires globally-carried solutions and risks management based on internationally-harmonized action. The endeavor of a commonly healthy world is challenged in light of the nowadays unprecedentedly-blatant healthcare inequality around the world. Based on macroeconomic modelling, our empirical research brought forward four indices shedding light on health inequality in the 21st digital century. International data on digitalization, economic prosperity, healthcare standards and innovation market financialization revealed that Europe and North America feature excellent starting positions on economic productivity and relatively low levels of corruption. Internet connectivity and high Gross Domestic Product are likely to lead on AI-driven big data insights for pandemic prevention, of which Europe, Asia and North America have optimal global healthcare leadership potential. Europe benefits from highest standards on public preventive medical care, while the United States has the most prosperous market financialization to advance medical innovations. Oceania performs well on general healthcare but has comparatively less international medical market power. Asia and the Gulf region are in the middle ranges of healthcare provision and market innovation financing but are critical on corruption, which also appears to hinder access to quality healthcare in South America. Africa ranks low on healthcare and raising funds for medical purposes in corruption-prone territories. The currently ongoing COVID-19 crisis has created awareness for the global interconnectivity of healthcare but also heighted attention to the drastic medical standard differences around the world, which unprecedentedly leverages the sustainable development mandate to grant equal access to healthcare.
数字21世纪的医疗不平等:要求人人平等获得优质医疗的理由
目前正在进行的COVID-19危机对世界各地的卫生构成挑战。公共和私营部门提供的医疗保健服务因国家而异。在21世纪人口高度流动和传染性最强的病毒相互联系的地球上,医疗保健在国际上的相互依存程度达到了人类历史上前所未有的程度。预防大流行比以往任何时候都更需要全球统一的解决方案和基于国际协调行动的风险管理。鉴于当今世界各地前所未有的公然医疗保健不平等,共同健康世界的努力受到挑战。基于宏观经济模型,我们的实证研究提出了21世纪健康不平等的四个指标。关于数字化、经济繁荣、医疗保健标准和创新市场金融化的国际数据显示,欧洲和北美在经济生产力方面处于良好的起点位置,腐败程度相对较低。互联网连接和高国内生产总值(gdp)可能会引领人工智能驱动的大数据洞察,以预防流行病,其中欧洲、亚洲和北美具有最佳的全球医疗保健领导潜力。欧洲享有最高标准的公共预防医疗服务,而美国拥有最繁荣的市场金融化,以推动医疗创新。大洋洲在一般医疗保健方面表现良好,但在国际医疗市场上的影响力相对较小。亚洲和海湾地区在医疗保健提供和市场创新融资方面处于中等水平,但在腐败方面至关重要,腐败似乎也阻碍了南美获得高质量医疗保健。在容易腐败的地区,非洲在医疗保健和为医疗目的筹集资金方面排名较低。目前正在进行的COVID-19危机使人们认识到全球医疗保健的相互关联性,但也使人们注意到世界各地医疗标准的巨大差异,这前所未有地利用了可持续发展任务来提供平等获得医疗保健的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信