ArticleBMC health services research2024
Prediction of COVID-19 patients' participation in financing informal care using machine learning methods: willingness to pay and willingness to accept approaches.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. 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.
- Enhancing awareness and uptake of home-based care services during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in Zambia.Journal of public health in Africa · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInformal care plays an essential role in managing the COVID-19 pandemic. Expanding health insurance packages that reimburse caregivers' services through cost-sharing policies could increase financial resources. Predicting payers' willingness to contribute financially accurately is essential for implementing such a policy. This study aimed to identify the key variables related to WTP/WTA of COVID-19 patients for informal care in Sanandaj city, Iran.
methodsThis cross-sectional study involved 425 COVID-19 patients in Sanandaj city, Iran, and 23 potential risk factors. We compared the performance of three classifiers based on total accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, negative likelihood ratio, and positive likelihood ratio.
resultsFindings showed that the average total accuracy of all models was over 70%. Random trees had the most incredible total accuracy for both patient WTA and patient WTP(0.95 and 0.92). Also, the most significant specificity (0.93 and 0.94), sensitivity (0.91 and 0.87), and the lowest negative likelihood ratio (0.193 and 0.19) belonged to this model. According to the random tree model, the most critical factor in patient WTA were patient difficulty in personal activities, dependency on the caregiver, number of caregivers, patient employment, and education, caregiver employment and patient hospitalization history. Also, for WTP were history of COVID-19 death of patient's relatives, and patient employment status.
conclusionImplementing of a more flexible work schedule, encouraging employer to support employee to provide informal care, implementing educational programs to increase patients' efficacy, and providing accurate information could lead to increased patients' willingness to contribute and finally promote health outcomes in the population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.