ReviewPharmacoEconomics2017
Emergent Challenges in Determining Costs for Economic Evaluations.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- The identification of economically relevant health and social care services for mental disorders in the PECUNIA project.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- A general framework for classifying costing methods for economic evaluation of health care.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2020Pooled it
- The complex price setting and reimbursement of non-industrial advanced therapy medicinal products.Health economics review · 2026Article
- Hospital-based health technology assessment of central dialysis fluid delivery system for hemodialysis patients.BMC nephrology · 2025Article
- Validation of the PECUNIA reference unit costs templates in Spain: a useful tool for multi-national economic evaluations of health technologies.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2024Article
- Developing a Program Costs Checklist of Digital Health Interventions: A Scoping Review and Empirical Case Study.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- A microcosting approach for planning and implementing community-based mental health prevention program: what does it cost?Health economics review · 2024Article
- Outsourcing the Management of Reusable Medical Devices in a Chain-Wide Care Setting: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study.Interactive journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Micro-costing analysis of suspected lower respiratory tract infection care in a French emergency department.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Harmonization issues in unit costing of service use for multi-country, multi-sectoral health economic evaluations: a scoping review.Health economics review · 2022Article
- Using community-engaged methods to develop a study protocol for a cost analysis of a multi-site patient navigation intervention for breast cancer care.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Development and delivery cost of digital health technologies for mental health: Application to the Narrative Experiences Online Intervention.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- A Cost-Consequence Analysis of PreemptiveJournal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Have Dutch Hospitals Saved Lives and Reduced Costs? A longitudinal patient-level analysis over the years 2013-2017.Health economics · 2021Article
- Is Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing Coming out on Top? A Comparison with Activity-Based Costing in the Health Field.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A micro costing analysis of the development of a primary care intervention to improve the uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening.Implementation science : IS · 2021Article
- The Impact of Tai Chi Exercise on Health Care Utilization and Imputed Cost in Residents of Low-Income Senior Housing.Global advances in health and medicine · 2021Article
- Micro-costing analysis of guideline-based treatment by direct-acting agents: the real-life case of hepatitis C management in Brazil.BMC gastroenterology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper describes methods of determining costs for economic evaluations of healthcare and considers how cost determination is being affected by recent developments in healthcare. The literature was reviewed to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the four principal methods of cost determination: micro-costing, activity-based costing, charge-based costing, and gross costing. A scoping review was conducted to identify key trends in healthcare delivery and to identify costing issues associated with these changes. Existing guidelines provide information on how to implement various costing methods. Bottom-up costing is needed when accuracy is paramount, but top-down approaches are often the only feasible approach. We describe six healthcare trends that have important implications for costing methodology: (1) reform in payment mechanisms; (2) care delivery in less restrictive settings; (3) the growth of telehealth interventions; (4) the proliferation of new technology; (5) patient privacy concerns; and (6) growing efforts to implement guidelines. Some costs are difficult to measure and have been overlooked. These include physician services for inpatients, facility costs for outpatient services, the cost of developing treatment innovations, patient and caregiver costs, and the indirect costs of organizational interventions. Standardized methods are needed to determine social welfare and productivity costs. In the future, cost determination will be facilitated by technological advances but hindered by the shift to capitated payment, to the provision of care in less restrictive settings, and by heightened concern for medical record privacy.
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.