MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6977421920 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.28428635

Supplementary materials: The economic impact of stent retriever selection for acute ischemic stroke: a cost analysis of MASTRO I from the healthcare system perspective of the United States, Canada and eight European countries

2025· dataset· en· W6977421920 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComparative Animal Anatomy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCost–benefit analysisMarginal costEconomic analysisCost-effectiveness analysisSelection (genetic algorithm)Perspective (graphical)Revascularization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

These are peer-reviewed supplementary materials for the article 'The economic impact of stent retriever selection for acute ischemic stroke: a cost analysis of MASTRO I from the healthcare system perspective of the United States, Canada and eight European countries' published in the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research.Supplementary Tables and FiguresSupplementary Table 1: Economic Outcomes of Probabilistic Scenario Analyses Supplementary Figure 1: Tornado Diagrams for Per-Patient Incremental Cost – US AnalysisSupplementary Figure 2: Tornado Diagrams for Per-Patient Incremental Cost – Canada AnalysisSupplementary Figure 3: Tornado Diagrams for Per-Patient Incremental Cost – UK AnalysisSupplementary Figure 4: Tornado Diagrams for Per-Patient Incremental Cost – Sweden AnalysisSupplementary Figure 5: Tornado Diagrams for Per-Patient Incremental Cost – Germany AnalysisSupplementary Figure 6: Tornado Diagrams for Per-Patient Incremental Cost – France AnalysisSupplementary Figure 7: Tornado Diagrams for Per-Patient Incremental Cost – Italy AnalysisSupplementary Figure 8: Tornado Diagrams for Per-Patient Incremental Cost – Spain AnalysisSupplementary Figure 9: Tornado Diagrams for Per-Patient Incremental Cost – Belgium AnalysisSupplementary Figure 10: Tornado Diagrams for Per-Patient Incremental Cost – The Netherlands AnalysisSupplementary MethodsCost Inputs for GermanyCost Inputs for FranceCost Inputs for The NetherlandsSupplementary Material ReferencesAim: According to the results of the MASTRO I living systematic review and meta-analysis, use of the EmboTrap Revascularization Device in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) results in higher rates of good functional outcomes (90-day modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0–2) compared with use of the Trevo Retriever or the Solitaire™ Revascularization Device. The aim of this analysis was to assess the potential economic impact of achieving improved functional outcomes for three commonly used stent retrievers (SRs) in the treatment of AIS. Methods: An economic modelwith short-term and long-term costs, representing a healthcare system perspective was developed using a decision tree to simulate a cohort of 1000 hypothetical patients treated for AIS with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) using EmboTrap, Trevo or Solitaire SRs. Based on the proportion of patients who achieved a 90-day mRS score of 0–2 or 3–5 for each device reported in MASTRO I (excluding patients not surviving after 90 days), this model estimated per-patient costs and the associated incremental cost savings. Results are reported from the healthcare system perspective in the US, Canada, the UK, Sweden, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Belgium and The Netherlands. Results: Across all ten countries, the use of EmboTrap during MT was associated with the lowest short-term (ranging from €8412 in Italy to $66,525 in the US), long-term (ranging from €5249 in Italy to $25,757 in the US) and total (ranging from €13,661 in Italy to $92,282 in the US) per-patient costs. The total per-patient cost was higher with Trevo (ranging from €14,601 in Italy to $97,487 in the US) and Solitaire (ranging from €14,840 in Italy to $98,814 in the US). Cost savings were highest when comparing EmboTrap versus Solitaire, followed by EmboTrap versus Trevo, with Trevo versus Solitaire having the smallest cost savings. Results of sensitivity and scenario analyses supported the robustness of the basecase results. Conclusion: Across the ten countries, treating patients with AIS with EmboTrap resulted in lower short-term, long-term and total costs to the payer. With rising healthcare costs and limited hospital budgets, these results suggest EmboTrap proves to be an evidence-based economical choice of SR for hospitals and healthcare systems.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2900.018

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
GenreDataset

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicComparative Animal Anatomy StudiesFrench-language works237,207