MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622477796 · doi:10.1111/voxs.12355

The cost of transfusing a unit of red blood cells: a costing model for Canadian hospital use

2017· article· en· W2622477796 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Olle Lagerquist, D. Poseluzny, G. Werstiuk, J. Slomp, Michael S. Maier, Susan Nahirniak, Gwen Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueISBT Science Series · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBlood donation and transfusion practices
Canadian institutionsCanadian Blood ServicesUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health ServicesNorthern Alberta Institute of Technology
FundersJanssen CanadaDepartment of Health, Western Cape GovernmentGovernment of Alberta
KeywordsActivity-based costingConsumablesOperations managementUnit (ring theory)Unit costCost accountingCost driverReceiptBusinessMedicineTotal costCapital costEmergency medicineMedical emergencyAccountingEconomicsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background No direct and thorough accounting of costs related to packed red blood cells ( PRBC s) has occurred in recent Canadian history. Our study sought to determine the cost accrued for a unit of PRBC within a Canadian hospital related to the inventory management, storage, testing, issuing and administration of the product. Methods An eight‐step costing model was developed to capture associated costs from the time of receipt at the hospital to the time of transfusion to a patient. Personnel, consumables and capital equipment costs within each step of the model were assessed using activity‐based accounting methods and German cost accounting principles. Results Based on 10,475 units, total in‐hospital cost per unit of PRBC was $243·10. Personnel, consumables and capital costs contributed 77·54%, 19·86% and 2·60% to this cost, respectively. Conclusion This study's in‐hospital costs of $243·10 summed with the $423·00 acquisition costs per unit PRBC from the blood supplier place the complete societal costs of one unit PRBC s at $666·10. This value is comparable, but lower than the majority of studies in the United States and Europe examining the societal costs of PRBC s.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations36
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISBT Science SeriesSame topicBlood donation and transfusion practicesFrench-language works237,207