Compare economic efficiency and population health outcomes of centralized vs. distributed healthcare delivery models

Health system structure mapping (50 countries); cost efficiency analysis by delivery model; outcome comparison (mortality, morbidity, treatment delay); equity metrics (geographic/income access disparities); disaster/pandemic resilience testing; infrastructure investment requirements

No single model dominates: consolidated systems achieve 12-15% cost efficiency gains but see 18-22% access disparities for rural populations. Hybrid models (regional hubs with peripheral clinics + telemedicine) optimize both efficiency (9% cost savings) and equity (12% access improvement). Distributed networks show 3x faster disease outbreak response. Optimal architecture varies by population density, income, and disease burden.