GuidelineInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2023
A consensus-based checklist for the critical appraisal of cost-of-illness (COI) studies.
Guideline in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 10 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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Adverse Drug Reaction Costs and Study Quality in Africa: A Systematic Review of Cost-of-Illness Studies.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Pooled it
- Economic burden and cost drivers of interstitial lung disease: a systematic review.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Pooled it
- Global Inequities in Unpaid Cancer Caregiving: A Systematic Review and Exploratory Meta-Analysis of Time and Cost Burden.Cancer medicine · 2026Pooled it
- The economic burden of dengue: a systematic literature review of unit costs for non-fatal episodes treated in the formal healthcare system.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Pooled it
- What is the impact of health literacy on healthcare costs? A systematic review and evidence synthesis.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- Burden of Chikungunya Fever and Its Economic and Social Impacts Worldwide: A Systematic Review.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2025Pooled it
- Costs of mental health care resource use in people with obesity: A systematic review.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Global and Regional Economic Burden of Eating Disorders: A Systematic Review and Critique of Methods.The International journal of eating disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Cost of treating severe malaria in children in Africa: a systematic literature review.Malaria journal · 2024Pooled it
- Healthcare Utilization and Direct Medical Costs of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment - A German Claims Data Study of 2778 Patients.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes and economic burden of bacterial meningitis in Africa: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Economic cost of movement behaviours: a systematic review.Journal of activity, sedentary and sleep behaviors · 2026Review
- The Burden of Disease of Treatment-Seeking Patients With a Cluster-C Personality Disorder in the Netherlands; Quality of Life, Functioning, and Societal Costs.Journal of clinical psychology · 2026Article
- Societal Economic Burden of Antibiotic Resistance in Uganda: A Cost of Illness Study.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Estimating the Clinical, Quality-of-Life and Economic Impact of Optimized Management of Type 2 Diabetes Patients in Spain.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Attributable societal cost of antimicrobial resistance in Ghana: a microsimulation study focusing on sociodemographic groups.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Quantifying the direct costs of diabetic retinopathy in a mixed healthcare system: a hospital-based study from governmental and patient perspectives.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Health-related quality of life and cost-of-illness in young people seeking peer support at @ease: A Dutch burden of disease study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop a consensus-based checklist that can be used as a minimum standard to appraise the comprehensiveness, transparency and consistency of cost-of-illness (COI) studies. This is important when, for instance, reviewing and assessing COI studies as part of a systematic review or when building an economic model.
methodsThe development process of the consensus-based checklist involved six steps: (i) a scoping review, (ii) an assessment and comparison of the different checklists and their questions, (iii) the development of a (preliminary) checklist, (iv) expert interviews, (v) the finalization of the checklist, and (vi) the development of guidance statements explaining each question.
resultsThe result was a consensus-based checklist for the critical appraisal of COI studies, comprising seventeen main questions (and some additional subquestions) across three domains: (i) study characteristics; (ii) methodology and cost analysis; and (iii) results and reporting. Guidance statements were developed describing the purpose and meaning behind each question and listing examples of best practice. The following answer categories were suggested to be applied when answering the questions in the checklist:
conclusionsThe consensus-based checklist for COI studies is a first step toward standardizing the critical appraisal of COI studies and is one that could be considered a minimum standard. The checklist can help to improve comprehensiveness, transparency and consistency in COI studies, to address heterogeneity, and to enable better comparability of methodological approaches across international studies.
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.