Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33404857›Full record

ReviewHealth economics review2021

Micro-costing in health and medicine: a critical appraisal.

Xiao Xu, Christina M Lazar, Jennifer Prah Ruger

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health economics review, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06258473 (Addressing Gaps in the Hypertension and Diabetes Care Continuum in Rural Bangladesh Through mHealth and Decentralized Primary Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 55 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

NCT06258473 phase1recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Addressing Gaps in the Hypertension and Diabetes Care Continuum in Rural Bangladesh Through mHealth and Decentralized Primary Care: The Dinajpur Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorBRAC UniversityRan2024 to 2026Enrolled6,750ConditionsHypertension, DiabetesArmsMulticomponent decentralized care, mHealth
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. A cost-consequence analysis of a community-based rehabilitation programme following hip fracture (Fracture in the Elderly Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation-FEMuR III).Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. 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

3 authors.

Xiao XuDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, USA.
Christina M LazarDepartment of Psychiatry, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, USA.
Jennifer Prah RugerDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, The Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, School of Social Policy & Practice, University of Pennsylvania, 3701 Locust Walk, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. jenpr@upenn.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0269-8935

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Economic Evaluation of Drug Abuse Treatment and HIV Prevention Services for PregnR01DA025555 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI PRAH RUGER, JENNIFER · 2009 to 2012
$2.6M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA025555NIDA NIH HHS R01DA025555
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConcerns about rising health care costs require rigorous economic study to inform clinical and policy decision-making. Micro-costing is a cost estimation methodology employing detailed resource utilization and unit cost data to generate precise estimates of economic costs. Micro-costing studies have not been critically appraised.

methodsCritical appraisal of micro-costing studies in English. Studies fully or predominantly employing micro-costing were appraised for methodological and reporting quality through economic evaluation guidelines (Evers, Drummond, Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS), Fukuda and Imanaka checklists). Following the Panel on Cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine, micro-costing studies were defined as involving "direct enumeration and costing out of every input consumed in the treatment of a particular patient."

resultsFull or predominant micro-costing studies included  neoplasms (18.5%), infectious and parasitic diseases (17.9%), and diseases of circulatory systems (10.8%) as the  most studied diseases. 36.9% were in the United States and 34.9% were in Europe. 33.8% did not report analytic perspective, 32.8% did not report price year, 3.6% did not inflation adjust cost data, and 44.1% did not specify inflation adjustment. 86.2% did not separately report unit costs and resource utilization quantity, 14.9 and 19.5% did not provide sufficient detail to assess appropriateness of measured physical units or valued costs.

conclusionsMicro-costing studies vary widely in methodological and reporting quality, highlighting the need to standardize methods and reporting of micro-costing studies and develop tools for their evaluation.

Indexed as

Economic evaluationHealth and medicineMicro-costingResource allocation

Identifiers

PMID33404857
PMCPMC7789519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.