Costs of Colposcopy Services and Their Impact on the Incidence and Mortality Rate of Cervical Cancer in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the results of a review of public health information from 5 Canadian Provincial Ministries of Health concerning costs and benefits of colposcopy in the management of cervical cancer. Data from the years 1971 to 2000 were included in the analysis. The incidence (8 or 9 per 100,000 women) and mortality rates (one to 3 per 100,000 women) were similar among all the provinces studied. However, the organization of health services, distribution methods, and remuneration systems varied considerably from province to province, creating difficulties for direct cost comparisons. Table 1 presents average costs for services associated with evaluation and treatment of abnormal cervical smears according to province. There is considerable variation in the costs of colposcopic services per procedure and of reimbursement among the different provinces. No fee schedule for colposcopy is available in British Columbia where colposcopy is provided in hospital-based clinics with salaried clinicians, so unit costs were computed from other data.TABLE 1: Colposcopy and related treatment costs by procedure and provinceThere is also significant variation in the utilization of colposcopy services among the provinces studied (Table 2). When the total unit cost per colposcopic examination was estimated, the results were between $66 and $77 per examination in all provinces except British Columbia where the provincial hospital-based colposcopy clinics staffed by salaried physicians resulted in an estimated cost of only $24.09 per colposcopic examination.TABLE 2: Colposcopic service by province and rate/100,000 female populationWhen treatment costs were compared, there was again a similarity among provinces with an average cost per treatment of $95 to $110 except in British Columbia where a higher fee schedule for loop electrosurgical excision procedures resulted in an average cost of $125 per treatment.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".