Prospective study of the patient‐level cost of asthma care in children*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objective was to assess the cost of asthma care at the patient level in children from the perspectives of society, the Ontario Ministry of Health, and the patient. In this longitudinal evaluation, health service use data and costs were collected during telephone interviews at 1, 3, and 6 months with parents of 339 Ontario children with asthma. Direct costs were respiratory-related visits to healthcare providers, emergency rooms, hospital admissions, pulmonary function tests, prescription medications, devices, and out-of-pocket expenses. Indirect costs were parents' absences from work/usual activities and travel and waiting time. Hospital admissions accounted for 43%, medications for 31%, and parent productivity losses for 12% of total costs from a societal perspective. Statistically significant predictors of higher total costs were worse symptoms, younger age group, and season of participation. Adjusted annual societal costs per patient in 1995 Canadian dollars varied from $1,122 in children aged 4-14 years to $1,386 in children under 4 years of age. From the Ministry of Health perspective, adjusted annual costs per patient were $663 in children over 4 years and $904 in younger children. Adjusted annual costs from the patient perspective were $132 in children over 4 years and $129 in children under 4 years. The rising incidence of pediatric asthma demands that greater attention be paid to the delivery of optimal care to this segment of the population. Appropriate methods must be used to analyze healthcare costs and the use of services in the midst of widespread healthcare reform. The quality of clinical and health policy decision-making may be enhanced by cost-of-illness estimates that are comprehensive, precise, and expressed from multiple perspectives.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".