Cost-of-Illness Methodology: A Guide to Current Practices and Procedures

Hodgson, Thomas A.; Meiners, Mark R.

doi:10.2307/3349801

Cited by 568 publications

(419 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

373

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An important part of any cost-ofillness study is to make a judgement of how well these Ôaccounting costsÕ reflect the true opportunity cost. The methodology used in the cost-of-illness studies is briefly discussed below and more extensively in previous publications (Hodgson and Meiners, 1982;Tolpin and Bentkover, 1983;Drummond et al, 1987).…”

Section: Cost-of-illness Methodsologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost of disorders of the brain in Europe 2010

Gustavsson¹,

Svensson²,

Jacobi³

et al. 2011

European Neuropsychopharmacology

1,354

801

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Cost-of-illness Methodsologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost of disorders of the brain in Europe 2010

Gustavsson¹,

Svensson²,

Jacobi³

et al. 2011

European Neuropsychopharmacology

1,354

801

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Long-term wage losses resulting from permanent total disability were based on estimates of lifetime wage loss calculated using a 2.5% discount rate and a standard age-earnings model for different age (5-year age groups) and gender categories (Hodgson and Meiners, 1982). To reflect the worker's current industry and occupation more accurately, the long-term wage losses for all permanent disabilities were multiplied by the ratio of hourly wages by age, race, sex, industry, and occupation to the hourly wages for different age and sex categories.…”

Section: Indirect Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For fatalities, we calculated lifetime wage losses using a 2.5% discount rate and a standard ageearnings model (Hodgson and Meiners, 1982) for different 5-year age groups and sex categories. Age-gender lifetime wage losses were adjusted for industry and occupation where possible, using average wages by age, gender, industry, and occupation based on 1993 CPS data.…”

Section: Indirect Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Costs of occupational injuries in construction in the United States

Waehrer

Dong²,

Miller

et al. 2007

Accident Analysis & Prevention

243

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents costs of fatal and non-fatal injuries for the construction industry using 2002 national incidence data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and a comprehensive cost model that includes direct medical costs, indirect losses in wage and household productivity, as well as an estimate of the quality of life costs due to injury. Costs are presented at the three-digit industry level, by worker characteristics, and by detailed source and event of injury. The total costs of fatal and nonfatal injuries in the construction industry were estimated at $11.5 billion in 2002, 15% of the costs for all private industry. The average cost per case of fatal or nonfatal injury is $27,000 in construction, almost double the per-case cost of $15,000 for all industry in 2002. Five industries accounted for over half the industry's total fatal and non-fatal injury costs. They were miscellaneous special trade contractors (SIC 179), followed by plumbing, heating and air-conditioning (SIC 171), electrical work (SIC 173), heavy construction except highway (SIC 162), and residential building construction (SIC 152), each with over $1 billion in costs.

show abstract

“…Variations include data sources, perspectives (healthcare, societal, etc. ), cost types, costing approach and discount rate (9). While standardisation of methodology through implementation of guidelines is becoming increasingly important, some flexibility may be required for diseases with special characteristics to be adequately described (3,9).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Socio-economic burden of rare diseases: A systematic review of cost of illness evidence

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t 2 Highlights  We systematically reviewed the socioeconomic cost literature for 10 rare diseases. Direct and indirect costs incurred by patients, carers and society were searched. 77 studies were included with an unequal distribution of studies over disease types. Level of existing evidence is highest for diseases with available drug treatments. Indirect costs are in most cases of similar or higher magnitude than direct costs. found to range between 1-2 per 100,000 population (PWS, a sub-type of Histiocytosis, and EB) up to 42 per 100,000 population (Scleroderma). Overall, cost evidence on rare diseases appears to be very scarce (a total of 77 studies were identified across all diseases), with CF (n=29) and Haemophilia (n=22) being relatively well studied, compared to the other conditions, where very limited cost of illness information was available. In terms of data availability, total lifetime cost figures were found only across four diseases, and total annual costs (including indirect costs) across five diseases.Overall, data availability was found to correlate with the existence of a pharmaceutical treatment and indirect costs tended to account for a significant proportion of total costs.Although methodological variations prevent any detailed comparison between conditions, most of the rare diseases examined are associated with significant economic burden, both direct and indirect.

show abstract

Cost-of-Illness Methodology: A Guide to Current Practices and Procedures

Cited by 568 publications

References 22 publications

Cost of disorders of the brain in Europe 2010

Cost of disorders of the brain in Europe 2010

Costs of occupational injuries in construction in the United States

Socio-economic burden of rare diseases: A systematic review of cost of illness evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About