A <scp>cost−utility</scp> study of elective haemorrhoidectomies in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aim was to estimate the 10-year cost-utility of haemorrhoidectomy surgery with preference-based measures of health using Canadian health utility measures and costs. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective haemorrhoidectomies by general and colorectal surgeons in British Columbia, Vancouver, between September 2015 and November 2022, completed preoperatively and postoperatively the EuroQol five-dimension five-level health-related quality of life questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) attributable to surgery were calculated by discounting preoperative and postoperative health utility values derived from the EQ-5D-5L. Costs were measured from a health system perspective which incorporated costs of hospital stay and specialists' fees. Results are presented in 2021 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: Of 94 (47%) patients who completed both the preoperative and postoperative questionnaires, the mean gain in QALYs 10 years after surgery was 1.0609, assuming a 3.5% annual discounting rate. The average cost of the surgery was $3166. The average cost per QALY was $2985 when benefits of the surgery were assumed to accrue for 10 years. The cost per QALY was higher for women ($3821) compared with men ($2485). Participants over the age of 70 had the highest cost per QALY ($8079/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Haemorrhoidectomies have been associated with significant gains in health status and are inexpensive relative to the associated gains in quality of life based on patients' perspectives of their improvement in health and well-being.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".