MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2902939559 · doi:10.1164/rccm.201810-1865st

Improving the Affordability of Prescription Medications for People with Chronic Respiratory Disease: An Official American Thoracic Society Policy Statement

2018· article· en· W2902939559 on OpenAlexaff
Minal Patel, Valerie G. Press, Lynn B. Gerald, Teresa Barnes, Kaela E. Blake, Lee K. Brown, Richard W. Costello, Courtney Crim, Mark Forshag, Andrea S. Gershon, Christopher H. Goss, MeiLan K. Han, Todd A. Lee, Stuart C. Sweet, Joe K. Gerald

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFormularyPrescription drugMedical prescriptionPharmacoeconomicsHealth careHealth policyFamily medicinePublic healthIntensive care medicineEconomic growthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mounting evidence indicates that out-of-pocket costs for prescription medications, particularly among low- and middle-income patients with chronic diseases, are imposing financial burden, reducing medication adherence, and worsening health outcomes. This problem is exacerbated by a paucity of generic alternatives for prevalent lung diseases, such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, as well as high-cost medicines for rare diseases, such as cystic fibrosis. Affordability and access challenges are especially salient in the United States, as citizens of many other countries pay lower prices for and have greater access to prescription medications. METHODS: The American Thoracic Society convened a multidisciplinary committee comprising experts in health policy pharmacoeconomics, behavioral sciences, and clinical care, along with individuals providing industry and patient perspectives. The report and its recommendation were iteratively developed over a year of in-person, telephonic, and electronic deliberation. RESULTS: The committee unanimously recommended the establishment of a publicly funded, politically independent, impartial entity to systematically draft evidence-based pharmaceutical policy recommendations. The goal of this entity would be to generate evidence and action steps to ensure people have equitable and affordable access to prescription medications, to maximize the value of public and private pharmaceutical expenditures on health, to support novel drug development within a market-based economy, and to preserve clinician and patient choice regarding personalized treatment. An immediate priority is to examine the evidence and make recommendations regarding the need to have essential medicines with established clinical benefit from each drug class in all Tier 1 formularies and propose recommendations to reduce barriers to timely generic drug availability. CONCLUSIONS: By making explicit, evidence-based recommendations, the entity can support the establishment of coherent national policies that expand access to affordable medications, improve the health of patients with chronic disease, and optimize the use of public and private resources.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.114
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.111
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1140.111
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0090.010
Scholarly communication0.0190.013
Open science0.0080.008
Research integrity0.1130.065
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations46
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→