MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308194635 · doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321520

Patient clusters and cost trajectories in the Swiss Atrial Fibrillation cohort

2022· article· en· W4308194635 on OpenAlexaff
Helena Aebersold, Miquel Serra‐Burriel, Fabienne Foster-Wittassek, Giorgio Moschovitis, Stefanie Aeschbacher, Angelo Auricchio, Jürg H. Beer, Eva Blozik, Leo H. Bonati, David Conen, Stefan Felder, Carola A. Huber, M Kuehne, Andreas Müller, Jolanda Oberle, Rebecca E. Paladini, Tobias Reichlin, Nicolas Rodondi, Anne Springer, Annina Stauber, Christian Sticherling, Thomas D. Szucs, Stefan Osswald, Matthias Schwenkglenks

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersSchweizerische HerzstiftungUniversität BaselFoundation for Cardiovascular ResearchSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationCohortEmergency medicineCluster (spacecraft)Cohort studyHealth careIndirect costsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Evidence on long-term costs of atrial fibrillation (AF) and associated factors is scarce. As part of the Swiss-AF prospective cohort study, we aimed to characterise AF costs and their development over time, and to assess specific patient clusters and their cost trajectories. METHODS: Swiss-AF enrolled 2415 patients with variable duration of AF between 2014 and 2017. Patient clusters were identified using hierarchical cluster analysis of baseline characteristics. Ongoing yearly follow-ups include health insurance clinical and claims data. An algorithm was developed to adjudicate costs to AF and related complications. RESULTS: A subpopulation of 1024 Swiss-AF patients with available claims data was followed up for a median (IQR) of 3.24 (1.09) years. Average yearly AF-adjudicated costs amounted to SFr5679 (€5163), remaining stable across the observation period. AF-adjudicated costs consisted mainly of inpatient and outpatient AF treatment costs (SFr4078; €3707), followed by costs of bleeding (SFr696; €633) and heart failure (SFr494; €449). Hierarchical analysis identified three patient clusters: cardiovascular (CV; N=253 with claims), isolated-symptomatic (IS; N=586) and severely morbid without cardiovascular disease (SM; N=185). The CV cluster and SM cluster depicted similarly high costs across all cost outcomes; IS patients accrued the lowest costs. CONCLUSION: Our results highlight three well-defined patient clusters with specific costs that could be used for stratification in both clinical and economic studies. Patient characteristics associated with adjudicated costs as well as cost trajectories may enable an early understanding of the magnitude of upcoming AF-related healthcare costs.

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)0.000
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 score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeartSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207