MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773002842 · doi:10.22374/1710-6222.24.3.8

What does the new ontario pharmacare plan offer children and young adults with rare disorders?

2017· article· en· W2773002842 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Nigel S. B. Rawson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical studies and practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormularyReimbursementMedicineFamily medicineOrphan drugPediatricsPolitical scienceHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A publicly-funded pharmacare program (OHIP+) was announced in the 2017 Ontario budget for all children and young adults that will begin in January 2018 and cover drugs in the Ontario Public Drug Programs (OPDP) formulary. In this commentary, drugs indicated for rare disorders commonly occurring in childhood that were reviewed by the Common Drug Review (CDR) between 2004 and 2016 are examined to assess the Ontario reimbursement situation. OPDP reimburse few of these drugs and only about half of those covered are accessible with consistency and without onerous conditions. Providing reimbursement for rare disorder drugs that received a positive CDR recommendation would likely cost less than a quarter of OHIP+'s projected cost. Children who will benefit most from OHIP+ are those with common conditions whose parents do not presently have access to provincial or private insurance. Children with rare disorders deserve accessible provincial financial support for potentially life-transforming drugs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.362 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical PharmacologySame topicPharmaceutical studies and practicesFrench-language works237,207