MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2258444280 · doi:10.1161/str.45.suppl_1.184

Abstract 184: Drivers of Costs Associated With Reperfusion Therapy in Acute Stroke: The IMS III Trial

2014· article· en· W2258444280 on OpenAlexaff
Kit N. Simpson, Annie N. Simpson, Patrick D. Mauldin, Michael D. Hill, Sharon D. Yeatts, Judith Spilker, Lydia D. Foster, Pooja Khatri, Renee Martin, Edward C. Jauch, Dawn Kleindorfer, Yuko Y. Palesch, Joseph P. Broderick

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Acute strokeEmergency medicineRandomized controlled trialEndovascular treatmentPsychological interventionClinical trialIschemic strokeInternal medicineSurgeryIschemiaTissue plasminogen activator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: The annual costs of stroke to the nation have been estimated to be over $38 billion, with nearly $22 billion attributed to direct medical costs. Objective: To understand cost drivers during the initial hospitalization for acute ischemic stroke subjects in the IMS III Trial. Design, Setting and Participants: Prospective cost analysis of subjects from U.S. centers treated with IV t-PA alone or IV t-PA followed by endovascular therapy in the IMS III trial. Cost of initial hospital admission was estimated from the actual hospital charges on UB04 billing forms provided by the treating hospitals. Cost profiles of the IMS III treatment groups were compared to profiles of a sample of US patients from the HCUP National Inpatient Sample (NIS) for 2010. Interventions: IV t-PA alone as compared to IV t-PA followed by endovascular therapy. Main Outcome Measure: Costs of hospitalization for acute stroke subjects. Results: The adjusted cost of a stroke admission in the study was $35,130 for subjects treated with endovascular therapy following IV t-PA and $25,630 for subjects treated with IV t-PA alone (p<0.0001). The higher cost in the endovascular therapy following IV t-PA treatment arm was largely explained by the costs of the devices. Significant factors related to costs included treatment group (higher costs with endovascular therapy), baseline NIH Stroke Scale (higher costs with higher severity), time from stroke onset to IV t-PA (lower costs with earlier treatment), age (higher costs with older age), stroke location (higher cost with right hemispheric location) and comorbid diabetes (higher costs with diabetes). The mean cost for subjects who had routine use of general anesthesia as part of endovascular therapy was $46,444 as compared to $30,350 for those who did not have general anesthesia. The costs of embolectomy for IMS III subjects and patients from the NIS cohort exceeded the Medicare DRG payment in more than 75% of hospitalized patients. Conclusions and Relevance: Changing the processes of acute stroke care, such as minimizing the time to start of IV t-PA and decreasing the use of routine general anesthesia, may improve the cost-effectiveness of medical and endovascular therapy for acute stroke.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→