MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401867497 · doi:10.1186/s13561-024-00547-x

Policies and cost analyses of voluntary assisted dying (VAD) laws – a mapping review & analysis

2024· review· en· W4401867497 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Economics Review · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLHealth careHealth economicsHealth services researchMEDLINEActuarial scienceMedicineSystematic reviewAccountingBusinessLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate the current literature on healthcare policies and cost analyses around international Voluntary Assisted Dying (VAD) laws. The study design is a mapping literature review following Preferred-Reporting-Items-for-Systematic-Reviews-and-Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Original research articles published between January 1990 to March 2023, investigating the financial cost and healthcare budget effect of VAD laws internationally. Citations were screened for relevance and eligibility, and any non-full-text research that did not explore cost analysis was excluded. The following data sources were screened: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and any relevant international health authority annual reports were also reviewed. Of the 2790 screened articles, eight studies met the inclusion criteria and three were included in the mapping review. The reviewed studies included prospective studies, two Canadian and one US. Only one of the Canadian studies provided a cost analysis using data from current VAD laws. All three studies showed VAD laws would reduce healthcare spending, with the US approximating $627million in 1995. Canada approximating $17.1 to $77.1million in 2017 and $86.9 to $149.0million in 2021, overall, leading to an average percentage reduction in costs of approximately 87% compared to original costs of end-of-life care. This review identifies a scarcity in cost-analysis literature and provides a summary of the latest international VAD laws, from which a potential cost reduction is apparent. The absence of retrospectively collated financial VAD data highlights a need for future research to inform policymakers of the economic factors affecting current policies with a need for annual fiscal reports and to optimise future legislative frameworks internationally. - This study highlights the absence of cost analysis reports on the provision of VAD globally, at a time when VAD is becoming an evolving part of end-of-life care particularly in developed countries base on the notion of patient autonomy. - The impact of this study is its ability to inform future research and policymakers of the economic factors affecting current VAD policies with a need for annual fiscal reports and to optimise future legislative frameworks internationally.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.640
GPT teacher head0.596
Teacher spread0.044 · 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