ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2024
Improvements in technology and the expanding role of time-driven, activity-based costing to increase value in healthcare provider organizations: a literature review.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing classification accuracy in medical datasets using a hybrid distance and cluster refinement-based K-means clustering method.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Supporting managerial decisions: a comparison of new robotic platforms through time-driven activity-based costing within a value-based healthcare framework.BMC health services research · 2025Article
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
Objective: This study evaluated the influence of technology on accurately measuring costs using time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) in healthcare provider organizations by identifying the most recent scientific evidence of how it contributed to increasing the value of surgical care. Methods: This is a literature-based analysis that mainly used two data sources: first, the most recent systematic reviews that specifically evaluated TDABC studies in the surgical field and, second, all articles that mentioned the use of CareMeasurement (CM) software to implement TDABC, which started to be published after the publication of the systematic review. The articles from the systematic review were grouped as manually performed TDABC, while those using CM were grouped as technology-based studies of TDABC implementations. The analyses focused on evaluating the impact of using technology to apply TDABC. A general description was followed by three levels of information extraction: the number of cases included, the number of articles published per year, and the contributions of TDABC to achieve cost savings and other improvements. Results: Fourteen studies using real-world patient-level data to evaluate costs comprised the manual group of studies. Thirteen studies that reported the use of CM comprised the technology-based group of articles. In the manual studies, the average number of cases included per study was 160, while in the technology-based studies, the average number of cases included was 4,767. Technology-based studies, on average, have a more comprehensive impact than manual ones in providing accurate cost information from larger samples. Conclusion: TDABC studies supported by technologies such as CM register more cases, identify cost-saving opportunities, and are frequently used to support reimbursement strategies based on value. The findings suggest that using TDABC with the support of technology can increase healthcare value.
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.