Evaluation of cost effectiveness for conservative and active management strategies for acoustic neuroma
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
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether economic costs associated with a conservative management strategy for unilateral acoustic neuroma offer an economic advantage over active management options. DESIGN: Cost and sensitivity analysis on a prospective cohort. SETTING: Single centre study within a tertiary referral centre in Toronto, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 72 patients (32 males, 40 females) aged 36 to 78 years with unilateral acoustic neuroma were assigned initially to a conservative management strategy. Entry criteria were small tumour size (less than 15 mm in the cerebellopontine angle), patient preference and/or significant co-morbidity. INTERVENTIONS: MRI scanning was performed every 6 months for the first year, annually subsequently and then every 2-3 years as required. Clinical review occurred every 6 months. Failure of conservative management led to active treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost analysis was performed to determine the mean total cost per patient for continued conservative management over the follow up period compared to the mean upfront total cost per patient undergoing active intervention. RESULTS: Cost analysis within the Canadian health care system determined the mean total cost per patient for microsurgical removal at CAD$22,402 (12,545 pounds; 14,561 euros), for gamma knife radiotherapy at CAD$27659 (15,489 pounds; 17,978 euros), for LINAC radiotherapy at CAD$9,003(5,041 pounds; 5,852 euros) and for conservative management at CAD$9,651 (5,405 pounds;6,273 euros) over the follow-up timeframe. CONCLUSION: An economic advantage can be demonstrated for the conservative management of acoustic neuromas compared to microsurgical removal and gamma knife radiotherapy on the proviso that no increase in active treatment complications arose from continued tumour growth during the period of observation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it