MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309889717 · doi:10.1111/ene.15645

Economic burden of Huntington disease in Europe and the USA: Results from the Huntington's Disease Burden of Illness study

2022· review· en· W4309889717 on OpenAlexaff
Idaira Rodríguez Santana, Tiago Mestre, Ferdinando Squitieri, Rosa Willock, Astri Arnesen, Alison Clarke, Barbara D’Alessio, Alex Fisher, Rebecca Fuller, Jamie Hamilton, Hayley Hubberstey, Cath Stanley, Louise Vetter, Michaela Winkelmann, Maria Doherty, Yunchou Wu, Alan Finnegan, Samuel Frank

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neurology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
FundersRoche
KeywordsHuntington's diseaseMedicineDiseaseBurden of diseaseDisease burdenPsychiatryCaregiver burdenDementiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The prevalence of Huntington disease (HD) has increased over time; however, there is a lack of up-to-date evidence documenting the economic burden of HD by disease stage. This study provides an estimate of the annual direct medical, nonmedical, and indirect costs associated with HD from participants in the Huntington's Disease Burden of Illness (HDBOI) study in five European countries and the USA. METHODS: The HDBOI is a retrospective, cross-sectional study. Data collection was conducted between September 2020 and May 2021. Participants were recruited by their HD-treating physicians and categorized as early stage (ES), mid stage (MS), or advanced stage (AS) HD. Data were collected via three questionnaires: a case report form, completed by physicians who collected health care resource use associated with HD to compute direct medical cost, and optional patient and caregiver questionnaires, which included information used to compute nondirect medical and indirect costs. Country-specific unit cost sources were used. RESULTS: HDBOI cost estimates were €12,663 (n = 2094) for direct medical costs, €2984 (n = 359) for nondirect medical costs, and €47,576 (n = 436) for indirect costs. Costs are higher in patients who are at later stages of disease; for example, direct medical costs estimates were €9220 (n = 846), €11,885 (n = 701), and €18,985 (n = 547) for ES, MS, and AS, respectively. Similar trends were observed for nondirect and indirect costs. Costs show large variations between patients and countries. CONCLUSIONS: Cost estimates from the HDBOI study show that people with HD and their caregivers bear a large economic burden that increases as disease progresses.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeurologySame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207