Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23962510›Full record

ReviewJournal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs2013

Economic studies in colorectal cancer: challenges in measuring and comparing costs.

K Robin Yabroff, Laurel Borowski, Joseph Lipscomb

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
20.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Genetic Testing.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. The Economic Impact of Rectal Cancer: A Population-Based Study in ItalyInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Costs and where to find them: identifying unit costs for health economic evaluations of diabetes in France, Germany and Italy.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2020
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

K Robin YabroffHealth Services and Economics Branch/Applied Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, 9609 Medical Center Dr, 3E436, Rockville, MD 20850, USA. yabroffr@mail.nih.gov
Laurel Borowski
Joseph Lipscomb
National Cancer Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Estimates of the costs associated with cancer care are essential both for assessing burden of disease at the population level and for conducting economic evaluations of interventions to prevent, detect, or treat cancer. Comparisons of cancer costs between health systems and across countries can improve understanding of the economic consequences of different health-care policies and programs. We conducted a structured review of the published literature on colorectal cancer (CRC) costs, including direct medical, direct nonmedical (ie, patient and caregiver time, travel), and productivity losses. We used MEDLINE to identify English language articles published between 2000 and 2010 and found 55 studies. The majority were conducted in the United States (52.7%), followed by France (12.7%), Canada (10.9%), the United Kingdom (9.1%), and other countries (9.1%). Almost 90% of studies estimated direct medical costs, but few studies estimated patient or caregiver time costs or productivity losses associated with CRC. Within a country, we found significant heterogeneity across the studies in populations examined, health-care delivery settings, methods for identifying incident and prevalent patients, types of medical services included, and analyses. Consequently, findings from studies with seemingly the same objective (eg, costs of chemotherapy in year following CRC diagnosis) are difficult to compare. Across countries, aggregate and patient-level estimates vary in so many respects that they are almost impossible to compare. Our findings suggest that valid cost comparisons should be based on studies with explicit standardization of populations, services, measures of costs, and methods with the goal of comparability within or between health systems or countries. Expected increases in CRC prevalence and costs in the future highlight the importance of such studies for informing health-care policy and program planning.

Indexed as

Cost of IllnessHealth Care CostsCanadaColorectal NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisFranceHumansUnited KingdomUnited States

Identifiers

PMID23962510
PMCPMC3859288
OpenAlexW2167963075

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.