168. AN INTRODUCTION TO THE BURDEN OF RA: A SOCIOECONOMIC SURVEY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: This study presents a bottom-up comparative approach to quantify the burden of disease for patients living with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) across the following European countries: France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Denmark, Sweden, Hungary, Poland, Romania and the UK. The objective was to quantify annual direct and indirect costs of three treatment groups: NSAIDs/no therapy, csDMARD(s) and no bDMARD, and bDMARD. Group definitions did not consider corticosteroids. Our retrospective cross-sectional sample captured resource use for a 12-month period and health-related quality-of-life. The estimates were then extrapolated to population level for each country. Methods: Rheumatologists, RA specializing internists and general practitioners were recruited and surveyed during the period April–June 2016. These practitioners were then tasked with providing a non-random cohort of RA patients meeting the study inclusion/exclusion criteria. Our total target sample size was 4,000 patients, based on achieving a representative sample of RA patients within each country. The study was governed by an independent steering committee consisting of charity representatives, university representatives, medics and health economists. This study was approved by the University of Chester Research Ethics Committee and conducted in accordance with relevant European guidelines. We developed an online survey in collaboration with patients and clinicians. This enabled our specialist sample to provide demographic and clinical information and 12-month ambulatory and secondary care activity for between 4 and 10 consulting patients. In turn, those patients were invited to provide direct and indirect non-medical cost information via a paper-based patient self-completed (PSC) questionnaire, covering work loss and out-of-pocket expenses, as well as information on quality of life and therapy adherence. A corresponding cost database was developed for each participating country, with a comprehensive cost profile for each patient.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".