{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01644962302947224, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.636363636363637, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
International comparison of health care systems using resource profiles.

The most frequently used bases for comparing international health care resources are health care expenditures, measured either as a fraction of gross domestic product (GDP) or per capita. There are several possible reasons for this, including the widespread availability of historic expenditure figures; the attractiveness of collapsing resource data into a common unit of measurement; and the present focus among OECD member countries and other governments on containing health care costs. Despite important criticisms of this method, relatively few alternatives have been used in practice. A simple framework for comparing data underlying health care systems is presented in this article. It distinguishes measures of real resources, for example human resources, medicines and medical equipment, from measures of financial resources such as expenditures. Measures of real resources are further subdivided according to whether their factor prices are determined primarily in national or global markets. The approach is illustrated using a simple analysis of health care resource profiles for Denmark, France, Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the USA. Comparisons based on measures of both real resources and expenditures can be more useful than conventional comparisons of expenditures alone and can lead to important insights for the future management of health care systems.