The Cost of Kidney Transplant over Time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Kidney transplant improves quality of life and survival compared with dialysis. Despite advances in immunosuppressant regimens and the prevention and treatment of acute rejection, graft survival rates have not improved significantly in the past decade. Although the clinical effectiveness of these regimens has been studied, the impact of changes over time on cost has not. METHODS: Costs of kidney transplant were compared between 2 periods demarcated by a programmatic change from cyclosporine (early) to tacrolimus (late) and from nonroutine induction (early) to routine induction (late) therapy in adult patients receiving a first kidney-only transplant in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, in an 8-year period. RESULTS: Complete costs for 3 years after transplant was available for 344 patients, including 161 adult recipients in the early period (April 1, 1998-December 31, 2001) and 183 adult recipients in the late period (January 1, 2002-March 31, 2006). The mean total 3-year cost of transplant for recipients was Can$100 034 in the early period and Can$144 712 in the late period largely attributed to increases in the cost of immunosuppressants (P< .001). CONCLUSIONS: Given that the cost of transplant has increased significantly over time, the cost-effectiveness of these and other immunosuppressive regimens should be evaluated carefully.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".