MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405081294 · doi:10.2147/jmdh.s465154

Higher Post-Acute Health Care Costs Following SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Adults in Ontario, Canada

2024· article· en· W4405081294 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Candace D. McNaughton, Peter C. Austin, Zhiyin Li, Atul Sivaswamy, Jiming Fang, Husam Abdel‐Qadir, Jacob A. Udell, Walter P. Wodchis, Douglas S. Lee, Ivona Mostarac, Clare Atzema

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsTrillium Health CentreTed Rogers Centre for Heart ResearchInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesInstitute of Health Services and Policy ResearchWomen's College HospitalSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersCorHealth OntarioOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)MedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakEmergency medicineHealth carePandemicEnvironmental healthIntensive care medicineVirologyInternal medicineOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose and Introduction: Growing evidence suggests SARS-CoV-2 infection increases the risk of long term cardiovascular, neurological, and other effects. However, post-acute health care costs following SARS-CoV-2 infection are not known. Patients and Statistical Methods: Beginning 56 days following SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, we compared person-specific total and component health care costs (2020 CAD$) for the first year of follow-up at the mean and 99 th percentiles of health care costs for matched test-positive and test-negative adults in Ontario, Canada, between January 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. Matching included demographics, baseline clinical characteristics, and two-week time blocks. Results: For 531,182 people, mean person-specific total health care costs were $513.83 (95% CI $387.37-$638.40) higher for test-positive females and $459.10 (95% CI $304.60-$615.32) higher for test-positive males, which were driven by hospitalization, long-term care, and complex continuing care costs. At the 99 th percentile of each subgroup, person-specific health care costs were $12,533.00 (95% CI $9008.50-$16,473.00) higher for test-positive females and $14,604.00 (95% CI $9565.50-$19,506.50) for test-positive males, driven by hospitalization, specialist (males), and homecare costs (females). Cancer costs were lower. Six-month and 1-year cost differences were similar. Conclusion: Post-acute health care costs after a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test were significantly higher than matched test-negative individuals, and these increased costs persisted for at least one year. The largest increases health care costs came from hospitalizations, long-term care, complex continuing care, followed by outpatient specialists (for males) and homecare costs (for women). Given the magnitude of ongoing viral spread, policymakers, clinicians, and patients should be aware of higher post-acute health care costs following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Plain Language Summary: We examined differences in health care costs for people who had a positive PCR for SARS-CoV-2 in Ontario, Canada, starting 56 days after the positive test at looking forward at least 1 year, matched by > 20 characteristics to people with a negative PCR within two weeks. During the study, the average health care costs per person were approximately $4800 (2020 CAD$). We found that on average, health care costs were $513.83 higher (2020 CAD$; +11% higher than average health care costs) for women who had a positive PCR test and $459.10 higher (+10% higher than average health care costs) for men who had a positive PCR test. Most of the increased costs were due to hospitalization, long-term care, and complex continuing care costs. When we looked at people who had the highest health care costs (the 99 th percentile), health care costs for women with a positive PCR test were $12,533.00 higher (+261% higher than average health care costs) and $14,604.00 higher for men (+304% higher than average health care costs), with higher costs driven by hospitalization, specialist (males), and homecare costs (females). Cancer costs were lower for people with a positive test. In summary, post-acute health care costs were higher for people who had a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test, after accounting for multiple patient-level factors. Higher costs persisted for a least one year of follow-up. Keywords: long COVID, health policy, sex differences

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designObservational
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Multidisciplinary HealthcareSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207