MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390702466 · doi:10.1177/11786329231224621

Real-World Cost-Consequence Analysis of an Integrated Chronic Disease Management Program in Saskatchewan, Canada

2024· article· en· W4390702466 on OpenAlexafffundabout
John Paul Kuwornu, Fernando Maldonado, Gary Groot, Erika Penz, Elizabeth Cooper, Amy Reid, Darcy D. Marciniuk

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Services Insights · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaSaskatchewan Health Quality CouncilUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatchewan HealthSaskatchewan Health Authority
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareSaskatchewan Health Research FoundationHealth CanadaGrifolsCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCovis PharmaMinistry of Health, SaskatchewanCanadian Thoracic SocietySanofiAstraZenecaAlberta Health ServicesGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsCOPDMedicineExacerbationHazard ratioConfidence intervalPulmonary diseaseInternal medicineProportional hazards modelPopulationRate ratioPhysical therapyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An integrated disease management program otherwise called a clinical pathway was recently implemented in Saskatchewan, Canada for patients living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study compared the real-world costs and consequences of the COPD clinical pathway program with 2 control treatment programs. The study comprised adult COPD patients in Regina (clinical pathway group, N = 759) matched on propensity scores to 2 independent control groups of similar adults in (1) Regina (historical controls, N = 759) and (2) Saskatoon (contemporaneous controls, N = 759). The study measures included patient-level healthcare costs and acute COPD exacerbation outcomes, both tracked in population-based administrative health data over a one-year follow-up period. Analyses included Cox proportional hazards models and differences in means between groups. The bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrap method was used to calculate 95% confidence intervals (CI). The COPD pathway patients had lower risks of moderate (hazard ratio [HR] =0.57, 95% CI [0.40-0.83]) and severe (HR = 0.43, 95% CI [0.28-0.66]) exacerbations compared to the historical control group, but similar risks compared with the contemporaneous control group. The COPD pathway patients experienced fewer episodes of exacerbations compared with the historical control group (mean difference = -0.30, 95% CI [-0.40, -0.20]) and the contemporaneous control group (mean difference = -0.12, 95% CI [-0.20, -0.03]). Average annual healthcare costs in Canadian dollars were marginally higher among patients in the COPD clinical pathway (mean = $10 549, standard deviation [SD] =$18 149) than those in the contemporaneous control group ($8841, SD = $17 120), but comparable to the historical control group ($10 677, SD = $21 201). The COPD pathway provides better outcomes at about the same costs when compared to the historical controls, but only slightly better outcomes and at a marginally higher cost when compared to the contemporaneous controls.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.935

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.388 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Services InsightsSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207