MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2253397145 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v8n9p194

Multiple Sclerosis and Catastrophic Health Expenditure in Iran

2016· article· en· W2253397145 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yaser Juyani, Dorsa Hamedi, Seyede Sedighe Hosseini Jebeli, Maryam Qasham

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAhvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsEquity (law)Catastrophic illnessHealth careHealth insuranceActuarial scienceEnvironmental healthMultiple sclerosisPopulationLogistic regressionMedicineBusinessEconomicsEconomic growthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There are many disabling medical conditions which can result in catastrophic health expenditure. Multiple Sclerosis is one of the most costly medical conditions through the world which encounter families to the catastrophic health expenditures. This study aims to investigate on what extent Multiple sclerosis patients face catastrophic costs. METHOD: This study was carried out in Ahvaz, Iran (2014). The study population included households that at least one of their members suffers from MS. To analyze data, Logit regression model was employed by using the default software STATA12. RESULTS: 3.37% of families were encountered with catastrophic costs. Important variables including brand of drug, housing, income and health insurance were significantly correlated with catastrophic expenditure. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that although a small proportion of MS patients met the catastrophic health expenditure, mechanisms that pool risk and cost (e.g. health insurance) are required to protect them and improve financial and access equity in health care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207