Time‐Driven Activity Based Costing of an Annual Canadian Cochlear Implant Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To define the cost necessary to run an adult cochlear implant (CI) program, including assessment, subsequent implantation, and follow from the Canadian provincial government perspective. STUDY DESIGN: Time-driven activity based costing (TDABC) of a CI program. SETTING: Adult provincial CI referral center. METHODS: Clinical scenario pathways were developed and verified with stakeholders. TDABC was then applied to all steps involved in the pathway. Costing was based on all patients referred to the CI program in 2019. All costs were calculated in Canadian (and American) dollars as of 2023. RESULTS: This is the first TDABC model of a CI program to the authors knowledge. In 2019, 296 referrals were placed to our CI program and 154 were surgical candidates. The calculated total annual cost for patients referred in 2019 was $4.542 million ($3.365 million USD), or $29,511 ($21,865 USD) per patient implanted. The largest cost contributors to patient cycles were surgical day costs ($23,164 [$17,185 USD] for unilateral, $43,356 [$32,165 USD] for bilateral), switch-on day costs ($1068 [$791 USD] for unilateral, $1511 [$1120 USD] for bilateral), and audiological assessment costs ($692 [$512 USD]). The highest single cost on the pathway was due to the actual CI device when used. Across other patient steps, the highest costs were related to labor. CONCLUSION: This TDABC evaluation of a CI program found the annual cost required to meet all referrals was $4.542 million ($3.365 million USD), or $29,511 ($21,865 USD) per patient implanted. The highest single-cost was associated with the CI device itself.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".