MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6999335383

The Cost-Effectiveness of Hypertension Modification Interventions to Reduce Dementia Burden

2024· article· en· W6999335383 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaPsychological interventionDiseaseVascular dementiaControl (management)MEDLINEPerspective (graphical)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modifying risk factors for dementia, such as hypertension, can significantly reduce the disease burden. Evidence on the economic value of diagnosing and controlling hypertension in relation to dementia has not been sufficiently investigated. The objectives of this thesis were to: 1) systematically review economic studies on the impact of hypertension modification on the dementia burden; 2) develop a lifetime economic model evaluating the cost-effectiveness of improved hypertension detection and management on the burden of dementia in Canada. The systematic review found that hypertension interventions were generally cost-effective; however, only two full economic evaluations were identified. The economic model found that hypertension diagnosis and control strategies were likely to be cost-effective from the perspective of dementia outcomes. Scenarios that improved hypertension control were significantly more cost-effective compared to the status quo. Future studies should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of real-world interventions to inform value-for-money for dementia investments.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→