ArticleHealth care science2026
Personalized Precision in Healthcare Payment Systems: Insights From a Real-World Cancer Patients Cohort Study.
Article in Health care science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Personalized Precision in Healthcare Payment Systems: Insights From a Real-World Cancer Patients Cohort Study.Health care science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The medical expenses of cancer patients have been rising worldwide, and the current payment system based on diagnosis-related groups is limited in reflecting the actual burden at the patient level. We aimed to develop a prediction model for reasonably high cost of hospitalization, taking gastric cancer (GC) patients undergoing surgery as an example. Methods: In this real-world patient cohort study, we collected clinical data from 3981 GC surgery inpatients in a tertiary hospital in Beijing, China. Reasonably high cost was defined as exceeding the 75th percentile of the hospitalization costs. The final model for reasonably high cost was derived based on univariate and multivariate unconditional logistic regression, with predictors selected according to the Akaike information criterion. Model performance was evaluated in terms of discrimination and calibration. Results: The final model consisted of 13 predictors, with the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.718 (95% confidence interval: 0.700-0.736). Leave-one-out cross-validation generated an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.708 (95% confidence interval: 0.690-0.727). No significant differences in model discrimination were detected among the subgroups stratified by gender, age, N stage, surgical method, and admission year. The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted probability and observed frequency of reasonably high cost. Conclusions: Our prediction tool for reasonably high cost of GC surgery patients has demonstrated good performance. The combined use of diagnosis-related groups payment and reasonably high cost assessment is expected to promote individualization and precision in medical cost control and ensure rational, efficient, and equitable provision of medical services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.