MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143263600 · doi:10.24095/hpcdp.28.3.02

A new population-based measure of the economic burden of mental illness in Canada

2008· article· en· W2143263600 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
K. L. Lim, Philip Jacobs, Arto Öhinmaa, Donald Schopflocher, Carolyn S. Dewa

Bibliographic record

VenueChronic diseases in Canada · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthInstitute of Health EconomicsAlberta HealthUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMental healthQuality of life (healthcare)PopulationMental illnessLiberian dollarEconomic costProductivityEnvironmental healthGerontologyQuality-adjusted life yearPsychiatryCost effectivenessEconomic growthNursingFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a comprehensive measure of the incremental economic burden of mental illness in Canada which incorporates the use of medical resources and productivity losses due to long-term and short-term disability, as well as reductions in health-related quality of life (HRQOL), for the diagnosed and undiagnosed population with mental illness. The analysis was based on the population-based Canadian Community Health Survey Cycle 2.1 (2003). For all persons, we measured all health services utilization, longterm and short-term work loss, and health-related quality of life and their dollar valuations, with the economic burden being the difference in dollar measures between the populations with and without mental health problems. In total, the economic burden was $51 billion in 2003. Over one-half was due to reductions in HRQOL. The current accepted practice in economic assessments is to include changes in medical resource use, work loss, and reductions in HRQOL.

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)0.001
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations274
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChronic diseases in CanadaSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207