MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401018698 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0307144

Direct and indirect costs of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies in adults: A systematic review

2024· review· en· W4401018698 on OpenAlexafffund
Eden Daniel, Ian C. P. Smith, Valentina Ly, Pierre R. Bourque, Ari Breiner, Hanns Lochmüller, Nancy Maltez, Kednapa Thavorn, Jodi Warman‐Chardon

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory Myopathies and Dermatomyositis
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioLibrary and Archives CanadaOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada First Research Excellence FundCanada Research ChairsPhysicians' Services Incorporated FoundationMuscular Dystrophy CanadaGovernment of CanadaEuropean CommissionUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMedicineIndirect costsCINAHLMEDLINEHealth careEmergency medicineIntensive care medicinePsychological interventionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) are rare disorders characterized by inflammation of skeletal muscle, which can result in fatty replacement of muscle, muscle atrophy, and subsequent weakness. Therapeutic advancements have improved clinical outcomes but impose an economic impact on healthcare systems. We aimed to summarize the direct and indirect costs associated with IIMs in a systematic review (PROSPERO Registration #CRD42023443143). Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus) were systematically searched for full-length articles (excluding case reports) reporting costs specific to patients diagnosed with an IIM, published between database inception and April 19, 2023. Direct cost categories included inpatient, outpatient, medication, home/long-term care, and durable medical equipment such as mobility and respiratory aids. Indirect costs included lost productivity. Eligibility criteria were met by 21 of the 3,193 unique titles identified. Costs are expressed in 2023 United States of America dollars, with adjustments for differences in purchasing power applied to currency conversions. As no study reported on all cost categories, annualized cost of IIM per patient was estimated by calculating the mean cost per category, and then adding the means of the different cost categories. By this method, IIM was estimated to cost $52,210 per patient per year. Proportional contributions by category were lost productivity (0.278), outpatient care (0.214), medications (0.171), inpatient care (0.161), home/long-term care (0.122), and durable medical equipment (0.053). Newer findings with intravenous immunoglobulin considered first line therapy for IIM demonstrated markedly higher annual medication costs per patient, upwards of $33,900 compared to an average of $3,908 ± $1,042 in older studies. Future cost-effectiveness studies require updated cost-of-illness studies reflecting the evolving sub-classification and treatment options for IIM, and should consider the impact of IIM on patients and their families.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.008
Bibliometrics0.0110.013
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicInflammatory Myopathies and DermatomyositisFrench-language works237,207