MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083723328 · doi:10.1586/erp.12.21

Modeling cost–effectiveness of pharmaceuticals in Alzheimer's disease

2012· letter· en· W2083723328 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Oremus, Jean‐Éric Tarride

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research · 2012
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDonepezilMemantineMedicineDiseaseCognitionAlzheimer's diseaseCognitive declineIntensive care medicinePsychiatryDementiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alzheimer's disease is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by cognitive and behavioral deficits. Donepezil and memantine are two medications used to treat the symptoms of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease. A modeled cost-effectiveness analysis found that treatment with donepezil to be less costly and more effective than no treatment or treatment with memantine in Germany. However, the model drew on non-German population data and could have been more transparent with regard to 'back-end' processes. In addition, the authors would question the extent to which the differences in effectiveness between treatments would be considered clinically significant. Identifying sources of cost savings for donepezil remains an important issue for future consideration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.539
GPT teacher head0.653
Teacher spread0.115 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes ResearchSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207