Cost of Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Canada among Patients on an Insulin Regimen for Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: People with diabetes are at a higher risk of developing a variety of medical conditions relative to those without diabetes, resulting in increased healthcare costs. Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is accepted as a recommended element of effective diabetes self-management. However, little is known about the real-world frequency and actual expenditures associated with SMBG, as well as the impact of SMBG costs relative to the cost of diabetes treatments. The primary objective is to evaluate the real-world utilization and costs of SMBG tests in Canada among insulin-treated diabetes patients during a 12-month follow-up period. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the IMS Brogan Inc. Drug Plan database from July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2010. Total costs during the 12-month follow-up period were assessed, focusing on blood glucose (BG) testing strip costs, insulin therapy costs, and costs associated with oral antidiabetics medications. All prevalent patients with two or more prescriptions for insulin between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2009 were initially included in the analysis, the first prescription serving as their index date. Depending on the insulin type(s) used, patients were subcategorized into one of four insulin regimen groups (basal, bolus, premix, or basal-bolus). RESULTS: Among an initial sample of patients with two or more claims for insulin between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2009, 142,551 met the aforementioned inclusion and exclusion criteria. An overall mean utilization of pharmacy-based blood glucose testing of approximately 1,094 strips per person per year was observed, with an average cost per testing strip of Canadian $0.79. SMBG treatment costs for insulin users ($860), specifically those associated with prescription testing strips, totaled 41.6% of the average annual pharmacy costs of diabetes-related prescriptions ($2,068). CONCLUSION: This study shows that SMBG accounts for approximately 40% of the total diabetes-related pharmacy costs for insulin users.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".