MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981043564 · doi:10.1111/add.14841

Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder: a systematic review of the cost of and savings from prevention in the United States and Canada

2019· review· en· W2981043564 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jacob R. Greenmyer, Svetlana Popova, Marilyn G. Klug, Larry Burd

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderMedicinePrimary preventionEnvironmental healthCost–benefit analysisPregnancyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) is a preventable condition that imposes a significant financial burden on societies. Funding of FASD prevention is a small portion of the total expenditures associated with FASD. This paper aimed to review the literature on the costs of and savings from prevention of FASD and present a model for the United States and Canada of projected savings based on expansion of existing evidence-based prevention models. METHODS: A systematic review of published literature on the cost of FASD prevention was conducted and experts in the field were interviewed. Studies that reported the cost of primary prevention of FASD were eligible for further consideration. RESULTS: Applying evidenced-based prevention programs to women at highest risk to have a future child with FASD greatly reduces the cost of prevention. In the United States, one case of FASD can be prevented for as little as USD $20 200 - 47 615. Cost of prevention is considerably less expensive than cost of care for a case of FASD. CONCLUSION: Expansion of risk-based prevention strategies for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder in the United States and Canada would be an economically efficient and worthwhile investment for society.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.672
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0120.017
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.277
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations47
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207