1. Directly respond to at least one classmate in a way that extends meaningful discussions, adds new information, and/or offers alternative perspectives.
The comparative analysis makes it likely to recognize strategies and actions related to several countries. Comparing the healthcare system performance of other countries by utilizing regulated performance data can offer standards and other effective insights into enhancing healthcare (Schneider et al., 2017). Comparing various countries can present new ideas and new methods of accomplishing things. Also, comparison increases the inaugural logic’s analytical power, such as determining if a country’s lucrative policy will work for another and increase the analytical explanation capability. Comparisons are good research; however, caution should be exercised because what might work well with one country may not benefit the other, and policy integration will likely require alteration. Acknowledging another country’s framework and civilization is vital when analyzing a health system, recommending health system reforms, and clarifying the statistics (Healy, 2003). The foundation for comparative analysis has two functions; it develops a list of study classifications that range from a health structure analysis down to a very comprehensive study of a specific component. This conceptual foundation assists in taking contrasts with various countries’ health systems to permit researchers and policy-makers to assess assumptions and study what works and why.
Healy, J. (2003). Analysing health care systems performance: the story behind the statistics. AUST NZJ. Public Health. 2003;27(6):642-4. Doi:10.1111/j. 1467-842x.2003.tb00613.x.
Schneider, E., Sarnak, D., Squires, D., Shah, A., Doty, M. (2017). Mirror, Mirror 2017: International comparison reflects flaws and opportunities for better U.S. health care. Retrieved from https://interactives.commonwealthfund.org/2017/july/mirror-mirror/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIiaT88JOn3AIVhsDACh2rkw2sEAAYASAEEgL9p_D_BwE