MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132995050

The cost-effectiveness of home nocturnal hemodialysis

2006· dissertation· W7132995050 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philip Alan McFarlane

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2006
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemodialysisDialysisHome hemodialysisNocturnalDiseaseActivity-based costingEnd stage renal diseaseRelative risk
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1.2.5 Conclusions. HNHD is a cost-effective dialysis modality, expected to be dominant when compared to IHD under usual conditions. The strength of our conclusions is limited by the non-randomized design. 1.2.1 Introduction. This thesis compares the relative cost-effectiveness of two forms of hemodialysis, conventional in-centre hemodialysis (IHD), where treatments take place in the hospital three times a week for four hours, and home nocturnal hemodialysis (HNHD), where treatments take place overnight in the home for six to eight hours. 1.2.3 Methods. We performed a one-year prospective costing study, during which 19 IHD and 24 HNHD patients underwent interviews to assess their utility score for current health by the standard gamble method. We used decision analysis techniques to examine the relative cost-effectiveness of HNHD and IHD over a lifetime with end stage renal disease using a Markov state-transition model comparing two strategies: only IHD or starting on IHD and subsequently transferring to HNHD. In addition, we examined methodological issues that arose during these studies. 1.2.4 Results. The total cost for health care delivery was 20% less for HNHD with projected mean annual costs more than $10,000 lower ($56,394 vs. $68,935). HNHD was associated with a higher utility score (0.77 +/- 0.23 vs. 0.53 +/- 0.35, p=.03), and was the dominant strategy with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $45,932 saved per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. In the decision analysis, HNHD was associated with a quality-adjusted survival estimate of 5.79 QALYs, with lifetime costs of $538,094. The values for IHD were 5.31 QALYs and $543,602 respectively, yielding an ICER of $11,475 saved per QALY gained. Important determinants of cost-effectiveness were transplantation time and whether benefits declined over time. Methodological issues were identified in modeling two time periods, interpreting cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, and eliciting preferences by different techniques. 1.2.2 Population. We compared all patients from the HNHD program at the Humber River Regional Hospital (n=33), and patients from the IHD program at St. Michael's Hospital in Toronto (n=23), selected if they were felt to be suitable for and interested in home hemodialysis. The groups were demographically similar.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→