ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2025
The burden of out-of-pocket and indirect costs of cutaneous leishmaniasis patients in Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2025. 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.
- The global burden and trends of cutaneous leishmaniasis from 1990 to 2021 with projections to 2036: a population-based study.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2026Article
- Effects of cutaneous leishmaniasis on health-related quality of life: A longitudinal approach.PloS one · 2025Observational
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
backgroundHealthcare expenses represent a proportionally greater burden for the poorest populations, which further exacerbates the negative impact of the disease on the individual's quality of life and productivity.
objectiveThe study aimed to identify the direct and indirect costs during the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) from the patients' perspective and examine factors influencing the costs burden among CL patients.
methodsA prospective cost analysis was conducted between April 2022 and April 2023 through interviews with patients with a confirmed diagnosis of CL. Direct costs were estimated using the micro-costing approach, and indirect costs using the human capital method. Descriptive analyses and hypothesis tests were conducted for associations between costs and sociodemographic and clinical variables, with a significance level of 5%.
resultsThe study included 68 patients, predominantly male (77.9%) with an average age of 53 years. Cutaneous leishmaniasis was the most common clinical form (76.4%), with new cases accounting for 79.4% of participants. Patients averaged 3.5 outpatient visits per CL treatment cycle, with miltefosine and intravenous meglumine antimoniate being the most prescribed therapies. Direct costs per treatment cycle averaged USD 117.36, attributed to transportation, food, and medical exams. Indirect costs from lost workdays amounted to USD 9,936.58, with an average of USD 160.12 per patient. Catastrophic expenditure (>10% of monthly income) was observed in 42.6% of families, significantly associated with direct cost, bacterial infection, and sociodemographic factors such as gender, age, and distance traveled.
conclusionsThis study underscores the substantial economic burden of CL treatment on patients, highlighting the need for targeted interventions to mitigate financial hardship, particularly among vulnerable socioeconomic groups.
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.