ReviewJournal of public health research2025
Different attitudes towards estimating indirect costs of disease: The example of cancer.
Review in Journal of public health research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Indirect Cost Analysis and Evaluation of Factors Affecting Indirect Costs in Patients Hospitalized with Acute Coronary Syndrome in Inpatient Wards of a Training and Research Hospital.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Assessing the scope and reporting quality of published health economic evaluation studies in Jordan: a systematic literature review.Health economics review · 2026Review
- Cost analysis of financial, productivity, and informal care burdens in families raising children with congenital anomalies.Health economics review · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Goal: Cost estimations in healthcare are crucial to make sound and adequate economic evaluations and assessments. The concept of indirect costs' estimation seems to be still not very well developed and systematized. This article is dedicated to the problem of indirect costs estimation of different types of cancer. The main aim of the article is to analyse the frequency of usage of different methods used for estimating indirect costs in economic analysis. Methods: There are discussed various methods used for indirect costs' estimations. Among them, in details, there are described: human capital approach (HCA), friction cost method (FCM) and health state valuation (HSV). There is included a systematic review of the articles dedicated to the problem of cancer costs'estimation. Principal findings: Analysing the results of our analysis it turns out that the most frequently used method of estimating indirect costs is the human capital approach (HCA). It makes more than 53% of the analysed studies. The second most frequently used method is the health state valuation (HSV) which constitutes less than 17%. Practical applications: Calculating indirect costs in the proper way is of a great importance to adequate overall costs' evaluation of disease. It is very important to be aware of different attitudes towards estimating indirect costs of diseases as it may allow for much more accurate assessments which will be beneficial for healthcare systems and proper allocation of limited resources. The deliberations presented in this paper might be very useful for the health technology assessment institutions.
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.