Direct Health Care Costs Associated with Asthma in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A better understanding of health care costs associated with asthma would enable the estimation of the economic burden of this increasingly common disease. OBJECTIVE: To determine the direct medical costs of asthma-related health care in British Columbia (BC). METHODS: Administrative health care data from the BC Linked Health Database and PharmaNet database from 1996 to 2000 were analyzed for BC residents five to 55 years of age, including the billing information for physician visits, drug dispensations and hospital discharge records. A unit cost was assigned to physician/emergency department visits, and government reimbursement fees for prescribed medications were applied. The case mix method was used to calculate hospitalization costs. All costs were reported in inflation-adjusted 2006 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: Asthma resulted in $41,858,610 in annual health care-related costs during the study period ($331 per patient-year). The major cost component was medications, which accounted for 63.9% of total costs, followed by physician visits (18.3%) and hospitalization (17.8%). When broader definitions of asthma-related hospitalizations and physician visits were used, total costs increased to $56,114,574 annually ($444 per patient-year). There was a statistically significant decrease in the annual per patient cost of hospitalizations (P<0.01) over the study period. Asthma was poorly controlled in 63.5% of patients, with this group being responsible for 94% of asthma-related resource use. CONCLUSION: The economic burden of asthma is significant in BC, with the majority of the cost attributed to poor asthma control. Policy makers should investigate the reason for lack of proper asthma control and adjust their policies accordingly to improve asthma management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".