Parkinson’s disease and nursing home placement: the economic impact of the need for care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To examine the relative risk (RR) for living in nursing homes for patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) compared with the general population and to ascertain society's costs related to nursing home placement for this patient group. METHODS: We evaluated the frequency of admission to nursing homes in a cross-sectional study and during a 12-year follow-up study of 108 patients with PD and 864 controls who were matched for age and sex. The RR for living in a nursing home was calculated at baseline and during follow-up. On the basis of 2007 prices, we estimated the costs per person year of survival for patients with PD and controls. RESULTS: The RR for living in a nursing home at baseline was 5.0 for patients with PD and 4.8 during follow-up. Patients with PD caused 4.8 times higher costs for nursing home placement with euro 18 875 versus euro 3978 per individual and year. The annual costs for institutional care of patients with PD in Norway were euro 132 million. CONCLUSION: Patients with PD have a substantially higher risk for living in nursing homes than the general population. This causes high costs to society. Therapeutic interventions to prevent or delay nursing home admissions are therefore important.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".