MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964659591 · doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2019.100457

The impact of pharmaceutical innovation on the burden of disease in Canada, 2000–2016

2019· article· en· W2964659591 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Frank R. Lichtenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueSSM - Population Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMerck Canada
KeywordsMedicineBurden of diseaseYears of potential life lostDisease burdenDisability-adjusted life yearDiseaseLaunchedDemographyEnvironmental healthGerontologyLife expectancyPopulationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We perform an econometric assessment of the role that pharmaceutical innovation-the introduction and use of new drugs-has played in reducing the burden of disease in Canada, by investigating whether diseases for which more new drugs were launched had larger subsequent reductions in disease burden. Since utilization of a drug reaches a peak about 12-14 years after it was launched, we allow for considerable lags in the relationship between new drug launches and the burden of disease. We analyze the impact of new drug launches on a comprehensive measure of disease burden-the age-standardized disability-adjusted life-years lost (DALY) rate-and on its two components: the age-standardized years of life lost (YLL) and years lost to disability (YLD) rates. We also analyze the impact of new drug launches on the number of hospital discharges and on the average length of hospital stays. The number of DALYs lost is significantly inversely related to the number of drugs that had ever been launched 9-20 years earlier, and the number of YLLs is significantly inversely related to the number of drugs that had ever been launched 11-20 years earlier. The launch of a drug has the largest (most negative) impact on the number of DALYs and YLLs 15 years after it was launched. The estimates indicate that if no drugs had been launched during 1986-2001, the age-standardized DALY rate would not have declined between 2000 and 2016; it might even have increased. Almost all (93%) of the reduction in DALYs was due to a reduction in YLL. The estimates imply that new drug launches during 1986-2001 reduced DALYs in 2016 by 21%, reduced YLLs in 2016 by 28%, and reduced YLDs in 2016 by 3%. We estimate that drugs launched during 1986-2001 reduced the number of DALYs lost in 2016 by 2.31 million. Expenditure in 2016 on drugs launched during 1986-2001 per DALY gained in 2016 from those drugs was 2842 USD. Interventions that avert one DALY for less than average per capita income for a given country or region are generally considered to be very cost-effective; Canada's per capita GDP was 42,158 USD in 2016, so our estimates indicate that the new drugs launched during 1986-2001 were very cost-effective, overall. Moreover, 2842 USD may be an overestimate of the true net cost in 2016 per DALY of drugs launched during 1986-2001. A previous study based on U.S. data showed that about 25% of the cost of new drugs is offset by reduced expenditure on old drugs. Also, our estimates indicate that, if no drugs had been launched during 1986-2001, the average length of 2016 hospital stays would have been about 16% higher. The reduction in hospital expenditure due to shorter average length of stay may have been larger than the expenditure on the drugs responsible for shorter hospital stays.

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 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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.422 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSM - Population HealthSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207