Health-care services utilization and costs associated with radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: a descriptive population-based study in the province of Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bladder cancer (BC) has the highest lifetime treatment costs per patient of all cancers. The objective of this study was to characterize the use of health-care services and costs associated with BC among patients who underwent radical cystectomy (RC) in the province of Quebec. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive study in a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent RC for BC between 2000 and 2009. Data was obtained from two health administrative databases (RAMQ and ISQ). We calculated average costs per patient and total costs in 2014 Canadian dollars for the following components of costs: 1) Pre-surgery costs (pre and post-urologist consultations, urologist consultations, cystoscopies, TURBTs, imaging procedures); 2) Costs of radical cystectomy and 3) Post-surgery costs (urologist consultations, post-operative consultations, medical oncologist consultations, imaging procedures and post-operative complication management). ARIMA models were used to evaluate trends in average costs per patient over the study period. RESULTS: Among 2759 patients included in the study (75% men), average pre-surgery costs, RC costs, and post-surgery costs were estimated at 3762$, 18979$ and 4770$, respectively. RC cost was responsible for 69% of total costs, followed by post-operative consultations (7.8%), post-operative complications and TURBTs (6% of total costs, each). Academic hospitals performed RC at a lower average cost, compared to community hospitals (difference of $1000, p < .0001). A decreased trend in post-surgery costs was detected in the year 2009. CONCLUSIONS: Costs of RC, TURBT, consultations and post-operative complications were the most important economic components of total RC cost per patient in Quebec. Academic hospitals performed RC at a lower cost, compared to community hospitals.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".