MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197604014 · doi:10.1093/ajhp/zxab364

Avoiding cost avoidance

2021· letter· en· W3197604014 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian Murray, Andrea Sikora

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · 2021
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPharmacistIntensive care unitCriticismQuarter (Canadian coin)Investment (military)Actuarial scienceValue (mathematics)PsychologyQuality (philosophy)Position (finance)MedicineBusinessMedical emergencyFamily medicineIntensive care medicineComputer scienceFinancePolitical scienceHistoryLawPharmacy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We applaud Dr. Erstad’s commentary on justification of the value of critical care pharmacist services and share in the belief that every patient managed in an intensive care unit (ICU) should receive the care of a critical care pharmacist.1 Yet, we want to caution both readers and future investigators against resting on the laurels of cost avoidance alone. First, cost avoidance is largely based on a paucity of data, reflecting poor-quality evaluations and expert opinion.2 Previous reports using these values have received notable criticism for the risk of overstating a pharmacist’s value.3,4 However, we note that, while estimated cost savings may be artificially higher when based on these low-quality data, even if the return on investment (ROI) ratio is a half or a quarter of the predicted ratio of 25:1 (noted in the most recent position statement for critical care pharmacists 5; ie, 12:1...

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)0.050
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0500.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.360
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.099 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Health-System PharmacySame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207