The economic burden of patient safety targets in acute care: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our objective was to determine the quality of literature in costing of the economic burden of patient safety. METHODS: We selected 15 types of patient safety targets for our systematic review. We searched the literature published between 2000 and 2010 using the following terms: "costs and cost analysis," "cost-effectiveness," "cost," and "financial management, hospital." We appraised the methodologic quality of potentially relevant studies using standard economic methods. We recorded results in the original currency, adjusted for inflation, and then converted to 2010 US dollars for comparative purposes (2010 US$1.00 = 2010 €0.76). The quality of each costing study per patient safety target was also evaluated. RESULTS: We screened 1948 abstracts, and identified 158 potentially eligible studies, of which only 61 (39%) reported any costing methodology. In these 61 studies, we found wide estimates of the attributable costs of patient safety events ranging from $2830 to $10,074. In general hospital populations, the cost per case of hospital-acquired infection ranged from $2132 to $15,018. Nosocomial bloodstream infection was associated with costs ranging from $2604 to $22,414. CONCLUSION: There are wide variations in the estimates of economic burden due to differences in study methods and methodologic quality. Greater attention to methodologic standards for economic evaluations in patient safety is needed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".