The Size, Share, and predictors of Publicly Financed Healthcare Costs in the Home Setting over the Palliative Care Trajectory: A Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The increasing attention on home-based service provision for end-of-life care has resulted in greater financial demands being placed on family caregivers. The purpose of this study was to assess publicly financed costs within a home-based setting from a societal perspective. METHODS: A prospective cohort study design was employed. In all, 129 caregivers of palliative care patients were interviewed biweekly for a total of 667 interviews. Multiple regression analysis (log-linear regression and seemingly unrelated regression [SUR]) was conducted. RESULTS: While publicly financed costs accounted for 20 percent of the full economic costs and increased with proximity to death, 76.7 percent of costs were borne by patients' caregivers in the form of unpaid caregiving. The share of publicly financed healthcare costs was driven by patients' and caregivers' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. CONCLUSION: These findings warrant affording greater attention to policies and interventions intended to reduce the economic burden on palliative patients and their caregivers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".