MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128439822 · doi:10.18502/pbr.v6i(s2).5660

The Dollar Value of Human Life Losses Associated With COVID-19 in Canada

2021· article· en· W3128439822 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joses Muthuri Kirigia, Rose Nabi Deborah Karimi Muthuri

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceutical and Biomedical Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife expectancyLiberian dollarCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicDemographyValuation (finance)Value of lifeMortality rateEconomicsGeographyDemographic economicsMedicineDiseaseSociologyPopulationInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to cause morbidity and premature mortality and ravage the socio-economic sectors in Canada.Objectives: The study aimed to appraise the Total Dollar Value of Human Life Losses (TDVHL) associated with COVID-19 in Canada. Methods: The net output approach was applied in the dollar valuation of the 8810 human life losses associated with COVID-19 in Canada as of July 16, 2020. The economic model wasrerun assuming 3%, 5%, and 10% discount rates with Canada’s life expectancy of 83 years, the world’s average life expectancy of 73 years, the world’s highest average life expectancy of88 years, and a 3% discount rate. Results: The human lives lost to COVID-19 had an estimated value of the international dollar (Int$) 2037021173 and an average of Int$ 231217 per human life lost. Quebec and Ontarioprovinces alone accounted for 94.99% of the TDVHL. Reanalysis of the economic model with discount rates of 5% and 10% resulted in declines in TDVHL of Int$ 192721390 (9%)and Int$ 530132423 (26%), respectively. Substitution of the nation with the word’s average life expectancy shrank the TDVHL by Int$ 1754972473 (86%) while applying the world’shighest life expectancy triggered a growth in the TDVHL of Int$ 498674987 (24%).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.327
GPT teacher head0.607
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmaceutical and Biomedical ResearchSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207