MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407602899

Economic impact of an ultrasonographic contrast agent on the diagnosis and initial management of patients with suspected renal artery stenosis.

2002· article· en· W2407602899 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jacques Lévesque, Yves Lacourcière, John M. Onrot, Stephanie R. Wilson, Esther Szaky, Micheline Thibodeau, Murray L. Vasilevsky, S M Dashefsky, Donald R. Allan, M Lafortune, Benoît Vendeville, Witold M. Zaleski, Denis Pagé, Franco D'onofrio

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal and Vascular Pathologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRenal artery stenosisStenosisRadiologyRenal arteryCost effectivenessSurgeryKidneyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine resource use in the diagnosis and management of Canadian hypertensive patients with suspected renal artery stenosis and to estimate the impact of diagnosis with contrast-enhanced duplex Doppler ultrasonography (US) on resource use. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Seventy-eight patients with suspected renal artery stenosis underwent usual diagnostic tests (captopril-enhanced renal scintigraphy or duplex Doppler US) and contrast-enhanced US. A management pathway ("planned") describing the medical resources required for further patient care was outlined on the basis of results from each test (separately), and a modified management pathway ("recommended"), which considered data from both diagnostic methods, was also outlined. Medical resources and productivity losses were assessed prospectively for a 3-month period after patients underwent both tests ("actual" management pathway). RESULTS: With usual diagnostic methods, 14 (18%) of the tests were inconclusive, whereas only 1 (1%) of the enhanced US examinations was inconclusive; the cost-efficacy ratio was $422 and $343 per successful diagnosis, respectively. Further management costs for patients with an inconclusive diagnosis were estimated at $6370 after the usual diagnostic tests, but only $1278 with enhanced US. Although the costs of the planned and recommended management pathways were similar ($227 and $294 per patient respectively), the proportion of patients requiring further resources was lower with enhanced US (56% v. 46%). Three-month actual management costs ranged from $121 to $1605 per patient (mean $360). Diagnostic tests and surgical procedures were the major cost drivers in all pathways, and costs were highest for patients in whom stenosis was diagnosed. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with suspected renal artery stenosis, contrast-enhanced US had a higher diagnostic success rate than usual diagnostic methods and afforded savings through lower administrative costs and lower medical resource consumption for patients whose diagnosis was unclear after usual diagnostic tests.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicRenal and Vascular PathologiesFrench-language works237,207