Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33148784›Full record

ArticleRMD open2020

Cost assessment of health interventions and diseases.

Bruno Fautrel, Annelies Boonen, Maarten de Wit, Sabine Grimm, Manuela Joore, Francis Guillemin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in RMD open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. The economic burden of lung cancer in low- and lower-middle-income countries: a systematic review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Economic burden of cardiovascular disease in the United Kingdom.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Bruno FautrelSorbonne Université - Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Pitie Salpetriere University Hospital, Rheumatology Department, Paris, France bruno.fautrel@aphp.fr.ORCID 0000-0001-8845-4274
Annelies BoonenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, and the CAPHRI Research Institute Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Maarten de WitPatient Research Partner, EULAR, Zaltbommel, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8428-6354
Sabine GrimmDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment (KEMTA), Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2175-7999
Manuela JooreDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment (KEMTA), Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Francis GuilleminEA 4360 APEMAC, School of Public Health, Nancy, France.ORCID 0000-0002-9860-7024

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health resource use and identification of related costs are two essential steps in health economics assessment. The elicited costs will be balanced with health outcome improvement and enable the comparison of different diagnostic procedures or therapeutic strategies from a health economic point of view. The cost typology can be disentangled in three main components, that is, direct cost related to health resource use, indirect costs related to productivity loss and sometimes intangible costs (costs related to pain and suffering). These costs can be elicited from different perspectives depending on the general aim of the assessment: payer, societal perspective or patient perspective. Practically, the first step corresponds to the quantification of health resource use, that is, number of consultations, biological or imaging workups, hospitalisation, dispensed medication units or days on sick leave. It can be done by specific self-questionnaires or by access to insurance health databases. The second step is then to value each health resource use item, based on available public databases-either produced by insurance entities or statistics institute-providing the unit costs for each item. Importantly, substantial variability does exist in the costing exercise, requiring accepting a certain uncertainty around cost estimates. This can be taken into account by sensitivity analyses, which capture in what extent measurement error can impact cost assessment, depending on different hypotheses or assumptions. One essential element of health economic assessment is the identification of costs incurred by or associated with a specific health condition for a study on the economic burden of a disease-cost-of-illness study-or with a given diagnostic or therapeutic intervention in the context of health technology assessment in which these costs are compared with the alternative reference strategy-cost-effectiveness study.

Indexed as

Cost of IllnessHospitalizationCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansEconomicsEpidemiologyHealth services research

Identifiers

PMID33148784
PMCPMC7856133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.