Validation and Pilot Testing of a Guide to Measure the Costs Associated with the Management of COVID-19 and of Healthcare Associated Infections in Residential and Long-Term Care Facilities in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction : As elsewhere in the world, Quebec (Canada) is currently facing the COVID-19 pandemic. Approximately 92% of deaths have occurred among people aged over 70, and approximately 100 long-term care (LTC) centers (termed CHSLDs in Quebec) were contaminated. This alarming situation is prompting stakeholders from healthcare networks to investigate the socio-economic repercussions of COVID-19. To the best of our knowledge, there is no valid and reliable tool to measure the costs associated with the management of COVID-19 in CHSLDs. Objectives : This research protocol aims to: i) adapt and validate for use in CHSLDs a combined guide, Cout-COVID19-SLD, developed from 2 guides used in acute care; ii) pilot the Cout-COVID19-SLD guide in CHSLDs and test its feasibility and afterwards resolve any barriers to its administration, and to conduct a partial estimate of costs brought about by COVID-19. Methods : A two-part prospective study will be conducted. Phase 1 will use a Delphi approach with 14 to 17 experts to validate the content of the Cout-COVID19-SLD guide. Phase 2 will pilot test the guide in a cross-sectional study in two CHSLDs. Discussion and conclusion : This study will provide a validated guide for the systematic measurement of costs associated with the management of COVID-19 (costs of preventive measures and costs of illness) in CHSLDs. Finally, this guide will serve as a valid and reliable instrument with which to better plan future research surrounding the socio-economic impacts of COVID-19 in CHSLDs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".