Determinants of Self-Reported Medicine Underuse Due to Cost: A Comparison of Seven Countries
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
OBJECTIVES: To compare the predictors of self-reported medicine underuse due to cost across countries with different pharmaceutical subsidy systems and co-payments. METHODS: We analysed data from a 2007 survey of adults in Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand (NZ), the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US). The predictors of underuse were calculated separately for each country using multivariate poisson regression. RESULTS: Reports of underuse due to cost varied from 3% in the Netherlands to 20% in the US. In Australia, Canada, NZ, the UK and the US, cost-related underuse was predicted by high out-of-pocket costs (RR range 2.0-4.6), below average income (RR range 1.9-3.1), and younger age (RR range 3.9-16.4). In all countries except Australia and the UK, history of depression was associated with cost-related underuse (RR range 1.2-4.1). In Australia, Canada, Germany, the UK and the US lack of patient involvement in treatment decisions was associated with cost-related underuse (RR range 1.2-1.4). In Australia, Canada and NZ, indigenous persons more commonly reported underuse due to cost (RR range 2.1-2.9). CONCLUSIONS: Cost-related underuse of medicines was least commonly reported in countries with the lowest out-of-pocket costs, the Netherlands and the UK. Countries with reduced co-payments or cost ceilings for low income patients showed the least disparity in rates of underuse between income groups. Despite differences in health insurance systems in these countries, age, ethnicity, depression, and involvement with treatment decisions were consistently predictive of underuse. There are opportunities for policy makers and clinicians to support medicine use in vulnerable groups.
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 | 0.039 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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