MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409805300 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089693

Longitudinal trajectories of healthcare costs among high-need high-cost patients: a population-based retrospective cohort study in British Columbia, Canada

2025· article· en· W4409805300 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Logan Trenaman, Daphne Guh, Kimberlyn McGrail, Mohammad Ehsanul Karim, Richard Sawatzky, Stirling Bryan, Linda Li, Marilyn Parker, Kathleen Wheeler, Mark D. Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsKelowna General HospitalInterior HealthArthritis Research Centre of CanadaWestern UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaTrinity Western UniversitySt. Paul's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEuroQol Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyHealth careDemographyActivity-based costingPopulationTotal costMultinomial logistic regressionCohortMedical prescriptionHealth economicsFamily medicinePublic healthGerontologyEnvironmental healthNursingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify groups of high-need high-cost (HNHC) patients with distinct cost trajectories and describe the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with group membership. DESIGN: A population-based retrospective cohort study, using administrative health data. SETTING: British Columbia, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: People who were HNHC in 2017, defined as incurring health system costs in the top 5% of the population, and were continuously registered in the Medical Service Plan from January 2015 to December 2019 and alive at the end of the study period. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary objective was to identify longitudinal patterns of healthcare costs using group-based trajectory modelling. Adopting a health sector perspective, we conducted person-level costing for hospital episodes, day surgeries, physician services, prescription medications, and home and community care services. The secondary objective was to explore sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with group membership using adjusted ORs and 95% CIs from a multinomial logit model. RESULTS: Our final sample comprised 5.4 million British Columbians. In 2017, 224 285 people met our definition of an HNHC and were included in our analysis (threshold: $C7968). We selected a model with five groups. These groups included those with persistently very high costs (44%, mean 5-year total: $C124 622); persistent high costs (32%, mean 5 year total: $C38 997); rising costs (7%, mean 5-year total: $C43 140); declining costs (10%, mean 5-year total: $C30 545); and those with a cost spike (7%, mean 5-year total: $C19 601). Being older, being in the lowest income quintile and having a greater number of comorbid health conditions were associated with increased odds of being in the persistently very-high-cost trajectory group relative to each other group. There was heterogeneity in the association between individual comorbidities and trajectory group membership. Several comorbidities were associated with a statistically significant increase in the odds of being in the persistently very-high-cost group compared with all other groups (eg, diabetes, renal failure), while others were associated with decreased odds (eg, metastatic cancer, alcohol abuse). CONCLUSION: This study unveils the complex and diverse cost trajectories of HNHC patients in British Columbia, highlighting the necessity for tailored healthcare strategies that address individual patient needs and circumstances. Notably, a high proportion of HNHC patients exhibit persistently high costs over a 5-year period, and available sociodemographic and clinical data are not predictive of group membership. Future research is needed to develop methods for predicting future HNHC patients and to identify evidence-based interventions that can improve patient outcomes and mitigate unnecessary healthcare utilisation and costs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207