MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398215083 · doi:10.1080/20523211.2024.2345218

A cost-effectiveness analysis for high versus standard (low) dose caffeine for the treatment of apnea in neonatal intensive care unit

2024· article· en· W4398215083 on OpenAlexaff
Eilan Alhersh, Dina Abushanab, Fouad Abounahia, Daniel Rainkie, Moza Al Hail, Palli Valapila Abdulrouf, Wessam Elkassem, Daoud Al‐Badriyeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersQatar National LibraryHamad Medical Corporation
KeywordsCaffeineMedicineNeonatal intensive care unitApneaIntensive care unitPharmacyIntensive care medicineApnea of prematurityStandard of careEmergency medicineAnesthesiaPediatricsInternal medicineFamily medicinePregnancyGestational age

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Preterm babies are prone to experiencing apnea of prematurity (AOP), mostly characterised by a pause in breathing lasting a minimum of 20 seconds. Recent literature supported higher maintenance doses of caffeine, indicating benefits. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of high maintenance dose (HD) versus low maintenance dose (LD) caffeine for AOP in neonates. Methods: From the hospital perspective of Hamad Medical Corporation (HMC), Qatar, a cost-effectiveness decision-analytic model was constructed to follow the use of a HD maintenance caffeine of 20 mg/kg/dose versus a LD maintenance caffeine of 10 mg/kg/dose, in a simulated cohort of AOP neonates, over a therapy follow-up duration of six weeks, until neonatal intensive care (NICU) discharge. The clinical inputs were primarily literature-based, while the resource cost and utilisation were locally extracted in HMC. The cost-effectiveness outcome measure was calculated per therapy success, defined as survival with no apnea and successful extubation removal within 72 hours, with or without adverse events. One-way and multivariate sensitivity analyses were performed to confirm the robustness of the results. Results: With 0.23 (95% CI, 0.23-0.23) enhancement in success rate, at United States dollar (US$) 3869 (95% CI, US$ 3823-3915) added infant cost, the HD caffeine was between dominant (34.8%) and cost-effective (63.7%), with an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US $16,895 (95% CI, US$ 15,242-18,549) relative to LD caffeine per additional case of success. The hospitalisation contributed the most to the total infant cost, and the probability of patent ductus arteriosus was the model input that influenced the results most. Conclusion: This is the first literature economic evaluation of caffeine for AOP. Despite increasing the cost of therapy, HD maintenance caffeine seems to be a cost-effective alternative to LD caffeine in Qatar. Our results support the recent global trends of increased use of HD caffeine for AOP in NICU.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.272
GPT teacher head0.577
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmaceutical Policy and PracticeSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207