MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Financial burden from wage losses after early breast cancer: Extent and determinants among Canadian women

2007· article· en· W2337713950 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sophie Lauzier, Elizabeth Maunsell, Mélanie Drolet, Nicole Hébert‐Croteau, Jacques Brisson, Doug Coyle, Benoı̂t Mâsse, Belkacem Abdous, A. Robidoux, J Robert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecHôpital du Saint-Sacrement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerWageDemographyCancerWorkforceProspective cohort studyGynecologyGerontologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9000 Background: Wage losses after breast cancer may result in considerable financial burden. More women now participate in the workforce and breast cancer is managed using multiple treatment modalities that could lead to long work absences. We evaluated the burden from wage losses and determinants among Canadian women in the first 12 months after newly diagnosed non-metastatic breast cancer. Methods: This prospective cohort study was conducted among 800 women from 8 hospitals (participation 83%) of whom 459 were working at diagnosis. For these latter women, information on potential determinants of wage losses, work absences, compensation received and perception of financial situation was collected by 3 telephone interviews over the year. Information on medical characteristics came from medical files. The main outcome was the relative loss, namely wages lost divided by annual wages the woman would have earned had she not been absent from work. ANOVA was used to identify determinants. Results: The median relative loss in the first year after diagnosis for the 403 women reporting an absence or reduced work hours was 19% or $5,502 (Can dollars). Multivariate analysis showed that the mean relative loss was 13% for women who reported that breast cancer was not at all costly compared to 22%, 33% and 38% among women who said that breast cancer was a bit, quite or very costly, respectively (ptrend<0.0001). A higher relative loss was significantly associated with a lower level of education (difference between lowest and highest levels = 8 %, ptrend=0.0016), living =50 km from the surgery hospital (diff = 6%, p=0.0697), lower social support (diff = 8%, p=0.0119), invasive disease (diff = 6%, p=0.0861), chemotherapy (diff = 17%, p<0.0001), self-employment (diff= 17%, p<0.0001), shorter tenure in the job (diff between lowest and highest levels = 12%, ptrend<0.0001) and part-time work (diff = 10%, p=0.0003). Conclusions: Financial effects of wage losses could add to the overall burden of breast cancer. Clinicians and policy makers should be sensitized further to the fact that financial burden may be important for working women having more aggressive treatment and precarious work situations. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicEconomic and Financial Impacts of CancerFrench-language works237,207