Evaluation of direct medical costs of hospitalization for febrile neutropenia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment of febrile neutropenia (FN) is costly, because it typically involves hospitalization. As cancer rates continue to increase, the number of patients suffering from FN will also increase, making it important to quantify the costs of treating this condition accurately and comprehensively. METHODS: A consecutive sample of patients admitted to an inpatient hematology/oncology ward at a tertiary care hospital for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced FN was enrolled in this study. Patients were followed prospectively during hospitalization, and information on medical resource utilization including length of stay, medications, and laboratory and diagnostic tests was collected. Costs, extracted from hospital and provincial databases, were used to calculate the overall cost per FN episode, from the hospital perspective. RESULTS: Fifty-one episodes of FN that occurred in 46 patients were included in the study. Approximately 52% of these episodes occurred in women, and 65% of these episodes occurred in patients with hematologic malignancies. The mean +/- standard deviation age of patients was 60.3 +/- 13.4 years. The mean length of stay per episode was 6.8 +/- 4.9 days. The mean overall cost per episode was 6324 +/- 4783 in 2007 Canadian dollars. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization for the treatment of FN is expensive. The results of this study could be used in future economic evaluations of preventive measures and treatments for FN, including primary prophylactic administration of hematopoietic growth factors and outpatient treatment of this condition.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it