The magnitude, share and determinants of unpaid care costs for home-based palliative care service provision in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With increasing emphasis on the provision of home-based palliative care in Canada, economic evaluation is warranted, given its tremendous demands on family caregivers. Despite this, very little is known about the economic outcomes associated with home-based unpaid care-giving at the end of life. The aims of this study were to (i) assess the magnitude and share of unpaid care costs in total healthcare costs for home-based palliative care patients, from a societal perspective and (ii) examine the sociodemographic and clinical factors that account for variations in this share. One hundred and sixty-nine caregivers of patients with a malignant neoplasm were interviewed from time of referral to a home-based palliative care programme provided by the Temmy Latner Centre for Palliative Care at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada, until death. Information regarding palliative care resource utilisation and costs, time devoted to care-giving and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics was collected between July 2005 and September 2007. Over the last 12 months of life, the average monthly cost was $14 924 (2011 CDN$) per patient. Unpaid care-giving costs were the largest component - $11 334, accounting for 77% of total palliative care expenses, followed by public costs ($3211; 21%) and out-of-pocket expenditures ($379; 2%). In all cost categories, monthly costs increased exponentially with proximity to death. Seemingly unrelated regression estimation suggested that the share of unpaid care costs of total costs was driven by patients' and caregivers' sociodemographic characteristics. Results suggest that overwhelming the proportion of palliative care costs is unpaid care-giving. This share of costs requires urgent attention to identify interventions aimed at alleviating the heavy financial burden and to ultimately ensure the viability of home-based palliative care in future.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".