MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416329910 · doi:10.1177/21925682251388407

Developing a Lifetime Cost Calculator for Spinal Cord Injury: The SCI Cost Calculator

2025· article· en· W4416329910 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Craig Mitton, François Dionne, Sydney Heschuk, John Chernesky, Julia A. Ross, Shannon Rockall, James Hektner, Richard Peter, Spring Hawes, Elaine Chan, William Chu Kwan, Vanessa K. Noonan

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Spine Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesVancouver Spine Surgery InstituteInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British ColumbiaPraxis Spinal Cord InstituteInterior Health
FundersGenome British ColumbiaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsCalculatorCost of livingTotal costCost estimateSpinal cord injuryHealth careIndirect costsCost driverEconomic cost

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Study DesignHealth economic model.ObjectivesSignificant work has been done to estimate the cost of spinal cord injury (SCI) from a health system perspective. Most of this work, however, does not establish the true cost to the individual living with SCI. This study aimed to develop a cost calculator reflecting both initial health care costs as well as lifetime costs with direct input from people living with SCI.MethodsCosts were seperated into initial costs and lifetime costs. For initial costs, estimates were obtained from Canadian SCI health care data and the literature, and were then adjusted for inflation to 2024. For lifetime costs, input from individuals living with SCI and clinical input were collected. Initial and lifetime costs were integrated into a novel, user-friendly cost calculator.ResultsThe SCI Cost Calculator provides an estimated lifetime SCI cost ranging from $1.9 M (older person living with incomplete SCI) to over $10 M 2024 Canadian dollars (younger person living with complete SCI) which is substantially higher than existing estimates. Initial costs can be as little as 3% of the lifetime cost for younger people or as high as 24% of the lifetime cost for older individuals.ConclusionCurrent cost estimates greatly understate the cost of living with SCI. To understand the support needed for persons living with SCI, an economic model that accurately reflects the costs of living with SCI is critical. Future work includes engaging the wider SCI community to enhance accuracy and validity of the cost domains identified.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Spine JournalSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207