ArticlePharmacoEconomics2023
Estimating Global Friction Periods for Economic Evaluation: A Case Study of Selected OECD Member Countries.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Methods for Estimating Productivity Losses due to Illness or Caregiving in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Pooled it
- Measuring, valuing, and incorporating patient and caregiver productivity costs in economic evaluations: a scoping review and environmental scan.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Article
- Adopting a Societal Perspective in Health-Economic Evaluation: Analysis of Nine HTA Methodological Guidelines on How to Integrate Societal Costs.Journal of market access & health policy · 2026Article
- A novel framework to assess the prevention value of a health intervention.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Review
- An Introduction to Costing and the Types of Costs Used within Health Economic Studies.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2025Review
- Expanding Cancer Prevention: Strategies Integrated into Occupational Health Surveillance.Cancers · 2025Review
- Article
- Workplace Vaccination Against COVID-19 and Seasonal Influenza in the United States: A Modeling-Based Estimation of the Health and Economic Benefits for Employers and Employees.Journal of market access & health policy · 2025Article
- Different attitudes towards estimating indirect costs of disease: The example of cancer.Journal of public health research · 2025Review
- Economic Evaluations of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Treating Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction: A Scoping Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Combating Antimicrobial Resistance Through a Data-Driven Approach to Optimize Antibiotic Use and Improve Patient Outcomes: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Impact of including productivity costs in economic analyses of vaccines for C. difficile infections and infant respiratory syncytial virus, in a UK setting.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2024Article
- Moving Forward with Taking a Societal Perspective: A Themed Issue on Productivity Costs, Consumption Costs and Informal Care Costs.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe friction cost approach (FCA) offers an alternative to the dominant human capital approach to value productivity losses. Application of the FCA in practice is limited largely due to data availability. Recent attempts have tried to standardise the estimation of friction periods across Europe, but to date, this has not been attempted elsewhere. Our aim was to estimate friction periods for 17 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries between 2010 and 2021 based on routinely published data.
methodsWe derived friction period estimates for Australia, Austria, Canada, Czechia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States. Vacancy stock and flow data was sourced from the OECD's short-term labour situation database from 2010 to 2021, and included the impact of Covid-19 on the labour market. The estimated friction periods were applied to cost cancer-related premature mortality for the United States as an illustrative case.
resultsThe average friction period in the five non-European countries (Australia, Canada, Korea, Japan and the United States) was 61.0 days (SD 9.4) (range between 44.8 days in Korea and 82.2 days in Canada) and the average friction period in the 12 European countries was 60.6 days (SD 14.8) (range between 34.1 days in Switzerland and 137.3 days in Czechia). In both cases, the outbreak of Covid-19 increased the length of the friction period. Our illustrative case revealed that productivity costs in the US were over a third lower using the study-specific friction period (56 days) compared with the conventionally assumed 90-day friction period applied in the literature as a default measure.
conclusionsOur results expand the potential application of the FCA outside of Europe and will support greater utilisation of the FCA and wider inclusion of productivity costs in societal-based economic evaluations based on the use of widely available and updated key labour market variables in our selected countries.
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.