Cost savings and effectiveness of outpatient treatment with low molecular weight heparin of deep vein thrombosis in a community hospital.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: This study was conducted at Centenary Health Centre of the Rouge Valley Health System, a community based hospital in Toronto. In January 1997, a new treatment was introduced for the management of patients with uncomplicated deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Eligible patients presenting at the ER were placed on LMWH (tinzaparin) and followed at home. Previously the patients had been hospitalized and treated with intravenous heparin until they reached a therapeutic international normalized ratio (INR). The intent of this study was to evaluate the patient outcomes and cost-savings of the new approach. METHODS: Data from all patients eligible for home care, treated in 1996 were assembled and compared with those from all eligible patients treated from April 1, 1997 to March 31, 1998. The data was collected by chart review and consisted of patient outcomes and costs during the period of heparin treatment. Costs for hospitalized patients were based on a per diem. For home care patients, the costs were itemized according to service and medication usage. All costs were calculated in 1999 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: In each one year period, 39 cases were treated. There was no serious adversity and the outcomes were compatible with what has been reported in the literature. The mean cost per patient for the 1996 hospitalized cohort was $3,266 compared to $584 for the subsequent home care cohort. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.00001). CONCLUSION: Home care with tinzaparin compared to hospital care with IV heparin resulted in a large mean saving per patient with no difference in outcome.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".