MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905496269 · doi:10.1161/hyp.72.suppl_1.p345

Abstract P345: The Cost-Effectiveness of Home BP Telemonitoring in Patients With a Cerebrovascular Event

2018· article· en· W2905496269 on OpenAlexaffabout
Raj Padwal, Peter W. Wood, Helen So, Scott Klarenbach

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency medicineStroke (engine)CohortMyocardial infarctionPharmacistUnstable anginaInternal medicinePharmacyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Home BP telemonitoring, with pharmacist case management, leads to clinically important BP reductions. Our objective was to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of this intervention compared with usual care BP control in patients with cerebrovascular disease in Alberta, Canada. Methods: A cost-utility analysis using a Markov decision model was created, examining a cohort of high-risk patients with a recent cerebrovascular event residing in their own residence. A lifetime time horizon and health care payer perspective was used. Achieved BP and risk of future cardiovascular events (recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, or death) were modelled, with attendant consequences on quality adjusted life years and costs. BP telemonitoring was assumed to occur monthly until BP was controlled, then quarterly. Canadian life tables were used to determine overall mortality, adjusted by CVD mortality. Relative efficacy on intervention-associated BP lowering were obtained from published data. Reduction in BP of 9.7/5.1 mmHg at 12-months was used in the base case. Resource use and costs were obtained from Canadian published literature. Results: Telemonitoring with case management led to net health care savings of $2326, and an additional 0.83 QALYs (see Table). Results were robust in sensitivity analysis (see Table). Conclusion: Home BP telemonitoring and pharmacist case management was a dominant strategy, as it lowered costs and improved QALYs, and should be implemented.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207