MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788268342 · doi:10.1200/jco.2017.75.2501

Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment After High-Deductible Insurance Enrollment

2018· article· en· W2788268342 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

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerDeductibleHazard ratioStage (stratigraphy)CancerInternal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) require substantial out-of-pocket spending and might delay crucial health services. Breast cancer treatment delays of as little as 2 months are associated with adverse outcomes. Methods We used a controlled prepost design with survival analysis to assess timing of breast cancer care events among 273,499 women age 25 to 64 years without evidence of breast cancer before inclusion. Women were included if continuously enrolled for 1 year in a low-deductible ($0 to $500) plan followed by up to 4 years in a HDHP (at least $1,000 deductible) after an employer-mandated switch. Study inclusion was on a rolling basis, and members were followed between 2003 and 2012. The comparison group comprised 2.4 million contemporaneously matched women whose employers offered only low-deductible plans. Measures were times to first diagnostic breast imaging (diagnostic mammogram, breast ultrasound, or breast magnetic resonance imaging), breast biopsy, incident early-stage breast cancer diagnosis, and breast cancer chemotherapy. Outcomes were analyzed by using Cox models and adjusted for age-group, morbidity score, poverty level, US region, index date, and employer size. Results After the index date, HDHP members experienced delays in receipt of diagnostic imaging (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.94 to 0.96), biopsy (aHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.89 to 0.95), early-stage breast cancer diagnosis (aHR, 0.83; 0.78 to 0.90), and chemotherapy initiation (aHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.86) compared with the control group. Conclusion Women switched to HDHPs experienced delays in diagnostic breast imaging, breast biopsy, early-stage breast cancer diagnosis, and chemotherapy initiation. Additional research should determine whether such delays cause adverse health outcomes, and policymakers should consider selectively reducing out-of-pocket costs for key breast cancer services.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.283 · 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