Factors associated with the high cost of liver transplantation in adults.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the overall direct cost of liver transplantation in Canadian adults and to identify the factors that are associated with high cost. METHODS: The direct cost of liver transplantation from the perspective of third-party payers was determined in a retrospective analysis of data from hospital charts and databases. A consecutive series of 119 adults who underwent liver transplantation between 1991 and 1992 was followed from the date of listing for transplantation to the second anniversary of the transplant. Patient-specific services during the pre-transplantation, transplantation and post-transplantation phases were compiled and costed. The primary consideration was the impact of complications on the cost of transplantation. Secondary considerations were the impact of age, sex of the patient, diagnosis and severity of liver disease on the total cost. RESULTS: The overall mean measured cost of liver transplantation was Can$89,066 (range from Can$30,505-Can$690,431). The multivariate logistic regression model for overall costs revealed that severe liver disease (OR = 11.97), cytomegalovirus infection (OR = 6.12), additional operative procedure (OR = 4.22) and biliary complications (OR = 5.00) were associated with an increased likelihood of high cost. The addition of services that were not measured in the present analysis increased the total overall cost to a mean of $121,732 (1998 Canadian dollars, follow-up costs discounted and inflation adjusted). INTERPRETATION: The factors that were associated with high cost of liver transplantation in Canadian adults were advanced liver disease, postoperative cytomegalovirus infection, the requirement for additional operative procedures and biliary complications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".