MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612986385 · doi:10.1161/jaha.116.004513

Observed Cost and Variations in Short Term Cost‐Effectiveness of Therapy for Ischemic Stroke in Interventional Management of Stroke (IMS) III

2017· article· en· W2612986385 on OpenAlexafffund
Kit N. Simpson, Annie N. Simpson, Patrick D. Mauldin, Yuko Y. Palesch, Sharon D. Yeatts, Dawn Kleindorfer, Thomas A. Tomsick, Lydia D. Foster, Andrew M. Demchuk, Pooja Khatri, Michael D. Hill, Edward C. Jauch, Tudor G. Jovin, Bernard Yan, Rüdiger von Kummer, Carlos A. Molina, Mayank Goyal, Wouter J. Schonewille, Mikaël Mazighi, Stefan T. Engelter, Craig S. Anderson, Judith Spilker, Janice Carrozzella, Karla J. Ryckborst, L. Scott Janis, Joseph P. Broderick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersGenentechH. Lundbeck A/SSouth Carolina Clinical and Translational Research Institute, Medical University of South CarolinaBristol-Myers Squibb CanadaAlberta InnovatesSchweizerische HerzstiftungNational Institutes of HealthSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungServierUniversity of South CarolinaNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesSynarcNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeMedical University of South CarolinaPfizerHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaBiogenPenumbraUniversitätsspital BaselBristol-Myers SquibbStrykerNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Modified Rankin ScaleTissue plasminogen activatorEmergency medicineQuality of life (healthcare)Medical recordCost effectivenessQuality-adjusted life yearPsychological interventionPhysical therapyIntensive care medicineIschemic strokeInternal medicineIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Examination of linked data on patient outcomes and cost of care may help identify areas where stroke care can be improved. We report on the association between variations in stroke severity, patient outcomes, cost, and treatment patterns observed over the acute hospital stay and through the 12-month follow-up for subjects receiving endovascular therapy compared to intravenous tissue plasminogen activator alone in the IMS (Interventional Management of Stroke) III Trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective data collected for a prespecified economic analysis of the trial were used. Data included hospital billing records for the initial stroke admission and subsequent detailed resource use after the acute hospitalization collected at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Cost of follow-up care varied 6-fold for patients in the lowest (0-1) and highest (20+) National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale category at 5 days, and by modified Rankin Scale at 3 months. The kind of resources used postdischarge also varied between treatment groups. Incremental short-term cost-effectiveness ratios varied greatly when treatments were compared for patient subgroups. Patient subgroups predefined by stroke severity had incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $97 303/quality-adjusted life year (severe stroke) and $3 187 805/quality-adjusted life year (moderately severe stroke). CONCLUSIONS: Detailed economic and resource utilization data from IMS III provide powerful evidence for the large effect that patient outcome has on the economic value of medical and endovascular reperfusion therapies. These data can be used to inform process improvements for stroke care and to estimate the cost-effectiveness of endovascular therapy in the US health system for stroke intervention trials. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Registration number: NCT00359424.

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 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart AssociationSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207