MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045394072 · doi:10.1056/nejmsa003087

Outcomes of Reference Pricing for Angiotensin-Converting–Enzyme Inhibitors

2002· article· en· W2045394072 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Health
FundersMinistry of Health, British ColumbiaPfizerBristol-Myers SquibbDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsMedicineMedical prescriptionCost sharingAngiotensin-converting enzymeConfidence intervalChristian ministryHazard ratioEmergency medicineInternal medicinePharmacologyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In January 1997, reference pricing for angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors for patients 65 years of age or older was introduced in British Columbia, Canada. For medications within a specific class, insurance covers the cost up to the reference price, and patients pay the extra cost of more expensive medications. Although reference pricing may reduce the costs of prescription drugs, there is concern that patients may switch to less effective medications or stop treatment. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Ministry of Health on all 37,362 residents of British Columbia who were 65 or older and were enrolled in the provincial health insurance program, received ACE inhibitors priced higher than the reference price of $27 a month in 1996, and were potentially affected by the new policy. We identified 5353 residents who switched to an ACE inhibitor not subject to cost sharing during the first six months and compared them with 27,938 residents who received only ACE inhibitors subject to cost sharing. RESULTS: Reference pricing for ACE inhibitors was not associated with changes in the rates of visits to physicians, hospitalizations, admissions to long-term care facilities, or mortality. The probability of stopping antihypertensive therapy decreased as compared with the probability before the change in policy (relative risk, 0.76; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.65 to 0.89). Eighteen percent of patients who had been prescribed ACE inhibitors subject to cost sharing switched to lower-priced alternatives. As compared with patients who did not switch, those who did had a moderate transitory increase in the rates of visits to physicians (rate ratio, 1.11; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.07 to 1.15) and hospital admissions through the emergency room (rate ratio, 1.19; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.99 to 1.42) during the two months after switching, but not subsequently. CONCLUSIONS: We found little evidence that when reference pricing for ACE inhibitors was introduced in British Columbia, patients stopped treatment for hypertension or that health care utilization and costs increased.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it