MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782962160 · doi:10.1002/nau.23477

The economic burden of overactive bladder in the United States: A systematic literature review

2018· review· en· W2782962160 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurourology and Urodynamics · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsBroadcom (Canada)Vancouver Coastal Health
FundersAstellas Pharma Global DevelopmentAstellas Foundation for Research on Metabolic Disorders
KeywordsOveractive bladderMedicineIndirect costsTotal costMEDLINEPopulationHealth careSystematic reviewUrinary incontinenceHealth economicsEnvironmental healthIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineDemographyPublic healthUrologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Overactive bladder (OAB) affects up to 17% of the United States (US) population. This study aimed to synthesize estimates of direct and indirect costs of OAB in the US and compare costs among those with and without OAB. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE/PubMed and Embase, from 2003 to 2016, following PRISMA guidelines. The target population was adults with idiopathic OAB or urge urinary incontinence from the US. Data were extracted on study and patient characteristics, all-cause and OAB-specific direct costs, resource use, and indirect costs. Costs were inflated to a common price year of 2016 USD. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included. Mean insurer paid all-cause total direct healthcare costs ranged from 8168 to 15 569 USD, and OAB-specific costs ranged from 656 to 860 USD per-patient annually. Estimates of the incremental costs for OAB patients compared to non-OAB comparators ranged from 43% to 117%. One study estimated total annual indirect costs of OAB at 11 134 USD per-patient. CONCLUSIONS: The range of direct healthcare costs reported for managing patients with OAB varied, but was relatively small given the differing contributing data sources, study designs, and cost definitions. Direct costs were consistently higher among patients with OAB versus non-OAB comparisons, from a 1.4- to >2-fold increase annually. OAB-specific costs made up a small proportion of all-cause costs, highlighting the clinical and economic impact of OAB-related conditions such as falls, urinary tract infection, and depression. Few studies were identified that examined the indirect costs of OAB in the US.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.325 · 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