Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10155283›Full record

ReviewPharmacoEconomics1994

Costs of illness in cost-effectiveness analysis. A review of the methodology.

T A Hodgson

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in PharmacoEconomics, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06409351 (Multi-mOdal Training Program to Promote Physical actIVity After sTrokE), which is not on this map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06409351 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Multi-mOdal Training Program to Promote Physical actIVity After sTrokE: MOTIVATE

TypeinterventionalSponsorSingapore General HospitalRan2024 to 2027Enrolled120ConditionsStroke, Physical InactivityArmsIntervention group
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Economic Burden of Obesity: A Systematic Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017
    Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Clinical and Therapeutic Implications of Male Obesity.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  7. Economic costs of cigarette smoking among adolescents in Nigeria.Zeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Social economic costs of COPD in Extremadura (Spain): an observational study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2018
    Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Cost-of-illness studies: concepts, scopes, and methods.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2014
    Review
  16. Cost of low back pain in Switzerland in 2005.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2011
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

T A HodgsonNational Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, Maryland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Costs of illness are an important input in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). Reviews of the literature have found that many CEAs are of low technical quality and fail to take account of costs of illness appropriately. The costs of illness and disease averted by an intervention, indirect costs, and medical care costs in added years of life are topics that present methodological issues and are not handled consistently in CEAs. Costs of illness and disease averted may be estimated by prevalence- or incidence-based methods; the correct conceptual paradigm depends on the nature of the disease. Incidence costs may be estimated by modelling the disease process, or directly from prevalence costs, the choice being determined by the extent and quality of data available. Regardless of the method, in forward-looking CEAs potential technological change must be taken into account so that incidence-based lifetime costs estimated from current treatment practices will not be biased. Whether to include indirect costs is an important issue, because indirect costs may be large and have a significant impact on the cost-effectiveness ratio. In the pure CEA model, indirect costs are excluded on ethical grounds and to prevent incursion of elements of cost-benefit analysis into CEA. The modified CEA model accepts enhanced productivity as an economic benefit made possible by, but distinct from, the health effect of an intervention. Indirect costs are included when appropriate, depending on the perspective of the analysis, the measure of effectiveness, and who bears the costs. When medical care extends life, expenditures will be incurred in the added years for illness and disease unrelated to the intervention. As with indirect costs, the pure CEA considers unrelated 'downstream' costs an indirect consequence of the health benefit of the intervention and excludes them from CEAs with the societal perspective. The modified CEA treats unrelated downstream costs as an economic effect of the change in health due to the intervention and includes them in order to have a more complete accounting of the cost of the intervention.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisCost of IllnessHealth Care CostsHumansIncidencePrevalence

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.