MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W112782752 · doi:10.24095/hpcdp.33.3.01

The economic burden of traumatic spinal cord injury in Canada

2013· article· en· W112782752 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Hans Krueger, VK Noonan, Logan Trenaman, Phalgun Joshi, C.S. Rivers

Bibliographic record

VenueChronic diseases and injuries in Canada · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsPraxis Spinal Cord InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHealth CanadaRick Hansen Institute
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)ParaplegiaSpinal cord injuryTetraplegiaDemographySpinal cordPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to estimate the current lifetime economic burden of traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) in Canada from a societal perspective, including both direct and indirect costs, using an incidence-based approach. METHODS: Available resource use and cost information for complete/incomplete tetraplegia and paraplegia was applied to the estimated annual incidence of tSCI, by severity, in Canada. RESULTS: The estimated lifetime economic burden per individual with tSCI ranges from $1.5 million for incomplete paraplegia to $3.0 million for complete tetraplegia. The annual economic burden associated with 1389 new persons with tSCI surviving their initial hospitalization is estimated at $2.67 billion. CONCLUSION: While the number of injuries per year in Canada is relatively small, the annual economic burden is substantial.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations285
Published2013
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChronic diseases and injuries in CanadaSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207