MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789136834 · doi:10.1007/s40801-018-0130-4

Economic Impact in Medicaid Beneficiaries with Schizophrenia and Cardiometabolic Comorbidities Treated with Once-Monthly Paliperidone Palmitate vs. Oral Atypical Antipsychotics

2018· article· en· W2789136834 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

VenueDrugs - Real World Outcomes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
FundersJanssen Scientific Affairs
KeywordsPaliperidone PalmitatePaliperidoneSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)MedicaidMedicinePsychiatryPediatricsAntipsychoticHealth careEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare persistence, costs, and healthcare resource utilization in patients with schizophrenia and cardiometabolic comorbidities treated with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate or an oral atypical antipsychotic. METHODS: Medicaid data from six states (07/2009-03/2015) were used to identify adults with schizophrenia and cardiometabolic comorbidities initiated on once-monthly paliperidone palmitate or an oral atypical antipsychotic (index date) on 01/2010 or after. Persistence to index medication at 12 months (no gap ≥ 90 days) was compared between patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate and an oral atypical antipsychotic using Chi-squared tests. The 12-month post-index healthcare costs and healthcare resource utilization were compared using multivariate ordinary least squares and Poisson regression, respectively. RESULTS: Selected patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (n = 371) were younger (mean age: 45.0 vs. 47.5 years, standardized difference = 24%) than patients taking oral atypical antipsychotics (n = 8296). Persistence at 12 months was higher in patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (40 vs. 33%, p = 0.006). Adjusted all-cause medical costs were lower in patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate vs. patients taking oral atypical antipsychotics (mean monthly cost differences = US $ - 369, p = 0.004) while all-cause pharmacy costs were higher (mean monthly cost differences = US $279, p < 0.001), resulting in no significant difference in total costs (mean monthly cost differences = US $ - 90, p = 0.357). No significant difference was observed in cardiometabolic comorbidity-related pharmacy or medical costs. Compared with patients taking oral atypical antipsychotics, patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate had more schizophrenia-related outpatient visits (incidence rate ratio = 1.44, p < 0.001) but fewer cardiometabolic comorbidity-related inpatient admissions (incidence rate ratio = 0.73, p < 0.001) with shorter lengths of stay (incidence rate ratio = 0.72, p = 0.020), and fewer cardiometabolic comorbidity-related long-term care admissions (incidence rate ratio = 0.56, p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia and cardiometabolic comorbidities who were initiated on once-monthly paliperidone palmitate had similar 12-month total healthcare costs compared with oral atypical antipsychotics. Cardiometabolic comorbidity-related utilization of inpatient and long-term care services was lower in patients taking once-monthly paliperidone palmitate.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.294 · 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