Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate cost savings from emergency contraceptive pills in Canada. METHODS: We modeled cost savings when a single emergency contraceptive treatment was provided after unprotected intercourse and when women were provided emergency contraceptive pills in advance. RESULTS: Each dollar spent on a single treatment saved $1.19--$2.35 (in Canadian currency), depending on the regimen and on assumptions about savings from costs avoided by preventing mistimed births. The dedicated products Preven (Shire Canada, Inc., Oakville, Ontario) and Plan B (Paladin Labs, Inc., Montreal) were cost-saving even under the least favorable assumption that mistimed births prevented today occur 2 years later. Each dollar spent on advance provision of Preven saved $1.24--$12.23, depending on the regular contraception method, on how consistently emergency contraception was used when needed, and on whether mistimed births were averted forever or simply delayed. Plan B was almost always cost-saving, although less so. CONCLUSION: Emergency contraception was cost-saving whether provided when the emergency occurred or in advance to be used as needed. More extensive use of emergency contraception could save considerable medical costs by reducing unintended pregnancies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".