Sociodemographic Correlates of Clinical Laboratory Test Expenditures in a Major Canadian City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The increasing cost of clinical laboratory testing is a challenge in our health care system. This study aims to calculate the annual clinical laboratory test costs attributed to patients in a major Canadian city and to correlate them to their sociodemographic variables. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study involving patients who received clinical chemistry, hematology, and microbiology tests in 2011 in Calgary, Canada (n = 610,409). Test volumes were obtained from a laboratory informatics database. Total expenditures per patient were calculated using estimated test costs and then combined with the 2011 Canadian Census Household Survey results to infer sociodemographic correlates. RESULTS: While more women received laboratory testing (58.4%), men had slightly higher testing costs per capita. Except for Chinese, visible minority and Aboriginal populations had higher testing costs. There was an inverse correlation between testing cost and household income, and accordingly, higher costs were found in those without postsecondary education and the unemployed. Furthermore, hotspot mapping revealed the geographical distribution of patient test costs within the city. CONCLUSIONS: There is variation in testing costs for patients among different sociodemographic variables.
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 | 0.014 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".