MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053423099 · doi:10.2310/7750.2009.08068

Work-Related Lost Productivity and Its Economic Impact on Canadian Patients with Moderate to Severe Psoriasis

2009· article· en· W2053423099 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brian Chan, Brigette Hales, Neil H. Shear, Vincent Ho, Charles Lynde, Yves Poulin, Nicole Mittmann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis
Canadian institutionsCentre de Recherche Dermatologique du Québec MétropolitainLynde Centre for DermatologyUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersAmgen Canada
KeywordsPsoriasisMedicineProductivityWork productivityPopulationDemographyDermatologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis impacts many different areas of a patient's life, including work productivity. There is no information regarding lost productivity owing to psoriasis in a Canadian population. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the lost productivity of Canadian patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. METHODS: Seventy-nine consecutive Canadian dermatology patients were interviewed and completed the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAIQ). RESULTS: On average, 2.2 hours (+/- 5.6 hours) were lost from work per week owing to psoriasis-related events. Absence from work may result in lost mean patient wages of C$2,270.84 per person per year. Total lost wages owing to moderate to severe psoriasis may cost up to approximately $749 million for all moderate to severe psoriasis patients in Canada. CONCLUSION: The results from our study indicate that moderate to severe psoriasis may have a substantial impact on the work productivity of patients with this disease.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.490
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations52
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and SurgerySame topicPsoriasis: Treatment and PathogenesisFrench-language works237,207