Coût de revient du suivi de la warfarine en clinique d'anticoagulothérapie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resume Introduction : Le cout global de la surveillance de la therapie a la warfarine est inconnu. Il est donc difficile d’estimer les retombees pharmacoeconomiques des nouveaux anticoagulants ne necessitant aucun monitorage. Objectifs : Determiner le cout direct de l’obtention, de l’analyse et de l’interpretation du rapport normalise international selon le lieu de prelevement de l’echantillon dans la perspective du systeme de sante quebecois. Methodologie : La population etudiee est constituee de tous les dossiers suivis par notre programme d’anticoagulotherapie entre le 1er avril 2008 et le 31 mars 2009. Le cout du rapport normalise international est tire du Repertoire quebecois et systeme de mesure des procedures de biologie medicale . On a utilise les salaires moyens ou medians, y compris les charges de l’employeur. Le cout moyen par visite a domicile a ete determine par un echantillonnage de 50 professionnels des centres de sante et de services sociaux participants afin de determiner la duree d’une visite et le nombre moyen de kilometres parcourus par visite. Resultats : En moyenne, la surveillance de la warfarine coute 7,62 $ par rapport numerise international effectue, y compris l’analyse. Cinquante pour cent (50 %) des patients sont suivis a domicile. Le cout s’eleve alors a 30,94 $ pour l’execution et l’analyse d’un rapport numerise international. La surveillance de l’anticoagulation a court terme coute 89,92 $ pour l’episode entier, alors que le cout annuel pour un traitement a long terme est de 137,16 $ par patient. Lorsque les prelevements doivent etre effectues a domicile, le cout annuel s’eleve a 694,08 $ par patient. Conclusions : Cette recherche permet de connaitre le cout global de la surveillance de la warfarine et d’estimer les retombees economiques des nouveaux anticoagulants oraux. Abstract Introduction: The global cost of monitoring warfarin therapy is unknown. It is thus difficult to estimate the pharmacoeconomic consequences of new anticoagulants that do not require any monitoring. Objectives: Within the perspective of the Quebec health system, to determine the direct costs related to acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of the international normalized ratio (INR) according to where the sample was drawn. Methods: The study population consisted of all patients followed in our anticoagulation program from April 1, 2008–March 31, 2009. The cost associated with the international normalized ratio was obtained from the Repertoire quebecois et systeme de mesure des procedures de biologie medicale. We used average or median salaries, including employer fees. The average cost per home visit was determined using a sampling of 50 professionals from participating Health and Social Service Centres (CSSS), this in order to determine the length of a visit and the average number of kilometers covered per visit. Results: On average, warfarin monitoring costs $7.62 per measured INR, including analysis. Fifty percent (50%) of patients were followed at home. The cost then increases to $30.94 for the execution and analysis of an INR. Monitoring anticoagulation on a short-term basis costs $89.92 for the entire episode, whereas the annual cost for long-term treatment is $137.16 per patient. When sampling is done at home, the annual cost increases to $694.08 per patient. Conclusion: This study established the global cost of monitoring warfarin and estimated the economic impact of the new oral anticoagulants.
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 | 0.008 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".