MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163286086 · doi:10.1093/jnci/djs512

Out-of-Pocket Costs in the Year After Early Breast Cancer Among Canadian Women and Spouses

2013· article· en· W2163286086 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Saint-Sacrement
FundersMinistère de la SantéMinistère de la Santé et des Services sociauxCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Breast Cancer Research AllianceUniversité Laval
KeywordsBreast cancerDemographyMedicineCancerPsychologyFamily medicineObstetricsInternal medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We lack comprehensive information about the extent of out-of-pocket costs after diagnosis of early breast cancer and their effects on the family's financial situation. METHODS: This longitudinal study assessed out-of-pocket costs and wage losses during the first year after diagnosis of early breast cancer among Canadian women and spouses. Out-of-pocket costs for treatments and follow-up, consultations with other practitioners, home help, clothing, and natural health products were estimated, with information collected from telephone interviews. Generalized linear models were used to identify women at risk of having higher costs and the effects of out-of-pocket costs on perceptions of the family's financial situation. RESULTS: Overall, 829 women (participation, 86.2%) and 391 spouses participated. Women's median net out-of-pocket costs during the year after diagnosis were $1002 (2003 Canadian dollars; mean = $1365; SD = $1238), and 74.4% of these costs resulted from treatments and follow-up. Spouses' median costs were $111 (mean = $234; SD = $320), or 9% of couples' total expenses. In multivariable analyses, the percentage of women with out-of-pocket costs of $1773 or more (upper quartile) was statistically significantly associated with higher education, working at diagnosis, living more than 50 km from the hospital where surgery was performed, and having two and three different types of adjuvant treatment (all 2-sided P values ≤ .01). However, when considered simultaneously with wage losses, out-of-pocket costs were not associated with perceived deterioration in the family's financial situation; rather, wage losses were the driving factor. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, out-of-pocket costs from breast cancer for the year after diagnosis are probably not unmanageable for most women. However, some women were at higher risk of experiencing financial burden resulting from these costs.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.218 · 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