MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4323350795 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwac036.169

A169 THE DIRECT COSTS OF INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE IN CANADA: A POPULATION-BASED ANALYSIS OF HISTORICAL AND CURRENT COSTS

2023· article· en· W4323350795 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Stephanie Coward, Eric I. Benchimol, C N Bernstein, J. Antonio Aviña‐Zubieta, Alain Bitton, Lindsay Hracs, J. B. Jones, E Kuenzig, L. Lu, Sanjay K. Murthy, Zoann Nugent, Anthony Otley, Remo Panaccione, Juan Nicolás Peña-Sánchez, H.B. Singh, Laura E. Targownik, Joseph W. Windsor, Gilaad G. Kaplan

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueInflammatory Bowel Disease
Établissements canadiensUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of British ColumbiaOttawa HospitalResearch CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineIndirect costsActivity-based costingPopulationHealth careConfidence intervalInflammatory bowel diseaseAmbulatoryAmbulatory careTotal costEmergency medicineDemographyInpatient careEnvironmental healthDiseaseInternal medicineBusiness

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a costly disease to manage due to hospitalizations, regular ambulatory monitoring, and expensive pharmaceutical therapies. While hospitalization rates have fallen, the increased use of biologics have escalated the cost of care to the healthcare system. Purpose To assess historical direct healthcare costs of the IBD population in Canada. Method Population-based administrative costing data were obtained from: Alberta, British Columbia, and Manitoba. Costs were calculated based on administrative data (2009 to 2016) which captured: hospitalizations, physician costs, ambulatory care such as: emergency visits, day surgery, and colonoscopy (AB only), and medication costs of IBD-specific medications, such as: mesalamine, biologics, steroids, and immunomodulators. Costs were converted to 2020 dollars using the consumer price index. Average annual cost per person (ACPP) was calculated for each province. Using province specific IBD prevalence estimates these ACPP were meta-analyzed to obtain the annual weighted costs, with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and these costs underwent meta-regression to ascertain the average annual change in cost per year. An Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average model was created to estimate the ACPP in 2023 with 95% prediction intervals (PI). Canada-wide total direct care costs of IBD patients, in billions (B), were calculated using the ACPP, Canada-specific IBD prevalence estimates (historical and forecasted), and total Canadian population calculations from Statistics Canada (historical and forecasted). Result(s) In 2009 the ACPP was $7000 (95%CI: 5389, 8610), representing $1.18B (95%CI: 0.91B, 1.45B) in direct healthcare costs in Canada for all IBD patients. The ACPP in 2016 was increased to $10,336 (95%CI: 6803, 13869), which equates to $2.37B (95%CI: 1.56B, 3.18B) per year in direct healthcare costs. From 2009 to 2016, the ACPP increased an average of $450 (95%CI: 132, 767) per year. If these historical trends continue to 2023 the ACPP is forecasted to be $13,333 (95%PI: 12827, 13839) per person per year. The largest contributor to these costs is medications—accounting for an estimated 50% of the total costs of IBD patients. Image Conclusion(s) The direct healthcare cost of IBD has risen steadily from 2009 to 2016 when the healthcare system spent over $10,000 per person with IBD and $2.37B nationwide. The primary driver of costs is medical management. Forecast models estimate that the annual cost may be over $13,000 per person in 2023. However, these estimates do not account for advent and increased uptake of novel biologics and small molecules, nor the downward cost pressure of biosimilars. These costs are those paid directly by the healthcare system and do not account for those born by the individual—it is estimated that the true cost of IBD (direct and indirect) is much higher. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below CIHR Disclosure of Interest S. Coward: None Declared, E. Benchimol Consultant of: Hoffman La-Roche Limited and Peabody & Arnold LLP for matters unrelated to medications used to treat inflammatory bowel disease and McKesson Canada and the Dairy Farmers of Ontario for matters unrelated to medications used to treat inflammatory bowel disease., C. Bernstein Grant / Research support from: Unrestricted educational grants from Abbvie Canada, Janssen Canada, Pfizer Canada, Bristol Myers Squibb Canada, and Takeda Canada. Has received research grants from Abbvie Canada, Amgen Canada, Pfizer Canada, and Sandoz Canada and contract grants from Janssen, Abbvie and Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie Canada, Amgen Canada, Bristol Myers Squibb Canada, JAMP Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Canada, Pfizer Canada, Sandoz Canada, and Takeda., Speakers bureau of: Abbvie Canada, Janssen Canada, Pfizer Canada and Takeda Canada, J. A. Avina-Zubieta: None Declared, A. Bitton: None Declared, L. Hracs: None Declared, J. Jones Consultant of: Janssen, Abbvie, Pfizer, Takeda, Speakers bureau of: Janssen, Abbvie, Pfizer, Takeda, E. Kuenzig: None Declared, L. Lu: None Declared, S. Murthy: None Declared, Z. Nugent: None Declared, A. Otley Grant / Research support from: Unrestricted educational grants from AbbVie Canada and Janssen Canada, Consultant of: Advisory boards of AbbVie Canada, Janssen Canada and Nestle, R. Panaccione Consultant of: Abbott, AbbVie, Alimentiv (formerly Robarts), Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Cosmos Pharmaceuticals, Eisai, Elan, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Galapagos, Fresenius Kabi, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Glaxo-Smith Kline, JAMP Bio, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Novartis, Oppilan Pharma, Organon, Pandion Pharma, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Progenity, Protagonist Therapeutics, Roche, Sandoz, Satisfai Health, Shire, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Theravance Biopharma, Trellus, Viatris, UCB. Advisory Boards for: AbbVie, Alimentiv (formerly Robarts), Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Glaxo-Smith Kline, JAMP Bio, Janssen, Merck, Mylan, Novartis, Oppilan Pharma, Organon, Pandion Pharma, Pfizer, Progenity, Protagonist Therapeutics, Roche, Sandoz Shire, Sublimity Therapeutics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Speakers bureau of: AbbVie, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Fresenius Kabi, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Merck, Organon, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Shire, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, J.-N. Pena-Sanchez: None Declared, H. Singh Consultant of: Pendopharm, Amgen Canada, Bristol Myers Squibb Canada, Roche Canada, Sandoz Canada, Takeda Canada, and Guardant Health, Inc.,, L. Targownik Grant / Research support from: Investigator initiated funding from Janssen Canada, Consultant of: [Advisory board] AbbVie Canada, Takeda Canada, Merck Canada, Pfizer Canada, Janssen Canada, Roche Canada, and Sandoz Canada, J. Windsor: None Declared, G. Kaplan Grant / Research support from: Ferring, Janssen, AbbVie, GlaxoSmith Kline, Merck, and Shire, Consultant of: Gilead, Speakers bureau of: AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, Amgen, and Takeda

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,042
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,307

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,006
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,003
Bibliométrie0,0040,012
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0020,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,207
Écart entre enseignants0,203 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2023
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Même sujetInflammatory Bowel Disease→Travaux en français237 207→