Costs of cancer care in children and adolescents in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cancer in children and adolescents presents unique issues regarding treatment and survivorship, but few studies have measured economic burden. We estimated health care costs by phase of cancer care, from the public payer perspective, in population-based cohorts. METHODS: Children newly diagnosed at ages 0 days-14.9 years and adolescents newly diagnosed at 15-19.9 years, from January 1, 1995 to June 30, 2010, were identified from Ontario cancer registries, and each matched to three noncancer controls. Data were linked with administrative records describing resource use for cancer and other health care. Total and net (patients minus controls) resource-specific costs ($CAD2012) were estimated using generalized estimating equations for four phases of care: prediagnosis (60 days), initial (360 days), continuing (variable), final (360 days). RESULTS: Mean ages at diagnosis were 6 years for children (N = 4,606) and 17 years for adolescents (N = 2,443). Mean net prediagnosis phase 60-day costs were $6,177 for children and $1,018 for adolescents. Costs for initial, continuing, and final phases were $138,161, $15,756, and $316,303 per 360 days for children, and $62,919, $7,071, and $242,008 for adolescents. The highest initial phase costs were for leukemia patients ($156,225 per 360 days for children and $171,275 for adolescents). The final phase was the most costly ($316,303 per 360 days for children and $242,008 for adolescents). CONCLUSIONS: Costs for children with cancer are much higher than for adolescents and much higher than those reported in adults. Comprehensive population-based long-term estimates of cancer costs are useful for health services planning and cost-effectiveness analysis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".