MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995194119 · doi:10.1200/jgo.19.00223

Expanding Coverage of Oncology Drugs in an Aging, Upper-Middle-Income Country: Analyses of Public and Private Expenditures in Chile

2019· article· en· W2995194119 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute for Quantitative Social Science, Harvard University
KeywordsMedicinePopulationQuarter (Canadian coin)Private sectorPaymentPublic healthPublic sectorEnvironmental healthEconomic growthFinanceBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The population of Chile has aged, and in 2017, cancer became the leading cause of death. Since 2005, a national health program has expanded coverage of drugs for 13 types of cancer and related palliative care. We describe the trends in public and private oncology drug expenditures in Chile and consider how increasing expenditures might be addressed. METHODS: We analyzed total quarterly drug expenditures for 131 oncology drugs from quarter (Q)3 2012 until Q1 2017, including public and private insurance payments and patient out-of-pocket spending. The data were analyzed by drug-mix, sources of funding, growth, and intellectual property status. The Laspeyres Price Index was used to analyze expenditure growth. RESULTS: We found 131 oncology drugs associated with 87,129 observations. Spending on drugs rose 120% from the first period, spanning from the first 3 quarters (Q3, Q4, Q1 2012-2013) to the last period (Q3, Q4, Q1 2016-2017), corresponding to an annualized rate of 19.2% and totaling US$398 million (in 2017 dollars). The public sector accounted for 84.2% of spending, which included 50 drugs in the official treatment protocols, whereas private insurance accounted for 7.3% in on-protocol drugs. The remaining 8.5% was paid out of pocket. In the public sector, more than 90% of growth resulted from increased use. Seven drugs, including 3 with nonexpired patents, accounted for 50% of total expenditures. CONCLUSION: Increased use and access enabled by expanded public expenditures drove most of the growth in oncology drug expenditures. However, the rate of public expenditure growth may be fiscally unsustainable. Policies are urgently needed to promote the use of generic drugs, the appropriate mix of on-protocol versus off-protocol drugs, and the curbing of off-label prescribing.

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)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.290 · 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