Variations in costs and use of provincially-funded testosterone replacement therapy across Canada: a population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Provincial drug-program policies for the reimbursement of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) vary across Canada, which may result in marked regional variability in use. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cross-sectional analysis of provincially funded TRT spending and utilization in eight provinces across Canada in 2012. We reported the annual cost per user, total cost, and rate of use of TRT overall and by formulation. RESULTS: We identified 23,544 provincially-funded recipients of TRT in 2012 in the eight provinces studied. Average annual cost per person varied by 3-fold, ranging from $173 (Prince Edward Island) to $485 (Ontario). Ontario also had the highest rate of use (1,105 users per 100,000 eligible) and the most liberal listing. Provinces with more restricted access (Alberta, British Columbia, and PEI) had lower annual costs per user ($293, $206, $173, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Differing reimbursement policies for TRT products across Canada are likely contributing to variation in the rate of use and cost per recipient.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".