Dataset Information

Cost-of-illness studies in rare diseases: a scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The aim of this scoping review was to overview the cost-of-illness studies conducted in rare diseases.

Methods

We searched papers published in English in PubMed from January 2007 to December 2018. We selected cost-of-illness studies on rare diseases defined as those with prevalence lower than 5 per 10,000 cases. Studies were selected by one researcher and verified by a second researcher. Methodological characteristics were extracted to develop a narrative synthesis.

Results

We included 63 cost-of-illness studies on 42 rare diseases conducted in 25 countries, and 9 systematic reviews. Most studies (94%) adopted a prevalence-based estimation, where the predominant design was cross-sectional with a bottom-up approach. Only four studies adopted an incidence-based estimation. Most studies used questionnaires to patients or caregivers to collect resource utilisation data (67%) although an important number of studies used databases or registries as a source of data (48%). Costs of lost productivity, non-medical costs and informal care costs were included in 68%, 60% and 43% of studies, respectively.

Conclusion

This review found a paucity of cost-of-illness studies in rare diseases. However, the analysis shows that the cost-of-illness studies of rare diseases are feasible, although the main issue is the lack of primary and/or aggregated data that often prevents a reliable estimation of the economic burden.

SUBMITTER: Garcia-Perez L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8045199 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhile health care and societal costs are routinely modelled for most diseases, there is a paucity of comprehensive data and cost-of-illness (COI) studies for inherited retinal diseases (IRDs). This lack of data can lead to underfunding or misallocation of resources. A comprehensive understanding of the COI of IRDs would assist governmental and healthcare leaders in determining optimal resource allocation, prioritizing funding for research, treatment, and support services for these patients.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, a literature search was conducted using Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases, from database inception up to 30 Jun 2023, to identify COI studies related to IRD. Original studies in English, primarily including patients with IRDs, and whose main study objective was the estimation of the costs of IRDs and had sufficiently detailed methodology to assess study quality were eligible for inclusion. To enable comparison across countries and studies, all annual costs were standardized to US dollars, adjusted for inflation to reflect their current value and recalculated on a "per patient" basis wherever possible. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42023452986).ResultsA total of nine studies were included in the final stage of systematic review and they consistently demonstrated a significant disease burden associated with IRDs. In Singapore, the mean total cost per patient was roughly US$6926/year. In Japan, the mean total cost per patient was US$20,833/year. In the UK, the mean total cost per patient with IRD ranged from US$21,658 to US$36,549/year. In contrast, in the US, the mean total per-patient costs for IRDs ranged from about US$33,017 to US$186,051 per year. In Canada, these mean total per-patient costs varied between US$16,470 and US$275,045/year. Non-health costs constituted the overwhelming majority of costs as compared to healthcare costs; 87-98% of the total costs were due to non-health costs, which could be attributed to diminished quality of life, poverty, and increased informal caregiving needs for affected individuals.ConclusionIRDs impose a disproportionate societal burden outside health systems. It is vital for continued funding into IRD research, and governments should incorporate societal costs in the evaluation of cost-effectiveness for forthcoming IRD interventions, including genomic testing and targeted therapies.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Emerging machine learning technologies are beginning to transform medicine and healthcare and could also improve the diagnosis and treatment of rare diseases. Currently, there are no systematic reviews that investigate, from a general perspective, how machine learning is used in a rare disease context. This scoping review aims to address this gap and explores the use of machine learning in rare diseases, investigating, for example, in which rare diseases machine learning is applied, which types of algorithms and input data are used or which medical applications (e.g., diagnosis, prognosis or treatment) are studied. METHODS:Using a complex search string including generic search terms and 381 individual disease names, studies from the past 10 years (2010-2019) that applied machine learning in a rare disease context were identified on PubMed. To systematically map the research activity, eligible studies were categorized along different dimensions (e.g., rare disease group, type of algorithm, input data), and the number of studies within these categories was analyzed. RESULTS:Two hundred eleven studies from 32 countries investigating 74 different rare diseases were identified. Diseases with a higher prevalence appeared more often in the studies than diseases with a lower prevalence. Moreover, some rare disease groups were investigated more frequently than to be expected (e.g., rare neurologic diseases and rare systemic or rheumatologic diseases), others less frequently (e.g., rare inborn errors of metabolism and rare skin diseases). Ensemble methods (36.0%), support vector machines (32.2%) and artificial neural networks (31.8%) were the algorithms most commonly applied in the studies. Only a small proportion of studies evaluated their algorithms on an external data set (11.8%) or against a human expert (2.4%). As input data, images (32.2%), demographic data (27.0%) and "omics" data (26.5%) were used most frequently. Most studies used machine learning for diagnosis (40.8%) or prognosis (38.4%) whereas studies aiming to improve treatment were relatively scarce (4.7%). Patient numbers in the studies were small, typically ranging from 20 to 99 (35.5%). CONCLUSION:Our review provides an overview of the use of machine learning in rare diseases. Mapping the current research activity, it can guide future work and help to facilitate the successful application of machine learning in rare diseases.

Project description:BackgroundRare Diseases (RDs), which are defined as diseases affecting no more than 5 out of 10,000 people, are often severe, chronic and life-threatening. A main problem is the delay in diagnosing RDs. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) for RDs are software systems to support clinicians in the diagnosis of patients with RDs. Due to their clinical importance, we conducted a scoping review to determine which CDSSs are available to support the diagnosis of RDs patients, whether the CDSSs are available to be used by clinicians and which functionalities and data are used to provide decision support.MethodsWe searched PubMed for CDSSs in RDs published between December 16, 2008 and December 16, 2018. Only English articles, original peer reviewed journals and conference papers describing a clinical prototype or a routine use of CDSSs were included. For data charting, we used the data items "Objective and background of the publication/project", "System or project name", "Functionality", "Type of clinical data", "Rare Diseases covered", "Development status", "System availability", "Data entry and integration", "Last software update" and "Clinical usage".ResultsThe search identified 636 articles. After title and abstracting screening, as well as assessing the eligibility criteria for full-text screening, 22 articles describing 19 different CDSSs were identified. Three types of CDSSs were classified: "Analysis or comparison of genetic and phenotypic data," "machine learning" and "information retrieval". Twelve of nineteen CDSSs use phenotypic and genetic data, followed by clinical data, literature databases and patient questionnaires. Fourteen of nineteen CDSSs are fully developed systems and therefore publicly available. Data can be entered or uploaded manually in six CDSSs, whereas for four CDSSs no information for data integration was available. Only seven CDSSs allow further ways of data integration. thirteen CDSS do not provide information about clinical usage.ConclusionsDifferent CDSS for various purposes are available, yet clinicians have to determine which is best for their patient. To allow a more precise usage, future research has to focus on CDSSs RDs data integration, clinical usage and updating clinical knowledge. It remains interesting which of the CDSSs will be used and maintained in the future.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Heart failure is a major and growing medical and economic problem worldwide as 1-2% of the healthcare budget are spent for heart failure. The prevalence of heart failure has increased over the past decades and it is expected that there will be further raise due to the higher proportion of elderly in the western societies. In this context cost-of-illness studies can significantly contribute to a better understanding of the drivers and problems which lead to the increasing costs in heart failure. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of published cost-of-illness studies related to heart failure to highlight the increasing cost impact of heart failure. METHODS:A systematic review was conducted from 2004 to 2016 to identify cost-of-illness studies related to heart failure, searching PubMed (Medline), Cochrane, Science Direct (Embase), Scopus and CRD York Database. RESULTS:Of the total of 16 studies identified, 11 studies reported prevalence-based estimates, 2 studies focused on incidence-based data and 3 articles presented both types of cost data. A large variation concerning cost components and estimates can be noted. Only three studies estimated indirect costs. Most of the included studies have shown that the costs for hospital admission are the most expensive cost element. Estimates for annual prevalence-based costs for heart failure patients range from $868 for South Korea to $25,532 for Germany. The lifetime costs for heart failure patients have been estimated to $126.819 per patient. CONCLUSIONS:Our review highlights the considerable and growing economic burden of heart failure on the health care systems. The cost-of-illness studies included in this review show large variations in methodology used and the cost results vary consequently. High quality data from cost-of-illness studies with a robust methodology applied can inform policy makers about the major cost drivers of heart failure and can be used as the basis of further economic evaluations.

Project description:Background:Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) cause a large and growing burden of morbidity and mortality in sub-Saharan Africa. Prospective cohort studies are key to study multiple risk factors and chronic diseases and are crucial to our understanding of the burden, aetiology and prognosis of NCDs in SSA. We aimed to identify the level of research output on NCDs and their risk factors collected by cohorts in SSA. Methods:We conducted a scoping review to map the extent of current NCDs research in SSA by identifying studies published after the year 2000 using prospectively collected cohort data on any of the six NCDs (cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, obesity, chronic kidney disease, chronic respiratory diseases, and cancers), ≥1 major risk factor (other than age and sex), set only within SSA, enrolled ≥500 participants, and ≥12 months of follow-up with ≥2 data collection points (or with plans to). We performed a systematic search of databases, a manual search of references lists from included articles and the INDEPTH network website, and study investigators from SSA were contacted for further articles. Results:We identified 30 cohort studies from the 101 included articles. Eighteen countries distributed in West, Central, East and Southern Africa, were represented. The majority (27%) set in South Africa. There were three studies including children, twenty with adults, and seven with both. 53% of cohorts were sampled in general populations, 47% in clinical populations, and 1 occupational cohort study. Hypertension (n = 23) was most commonly reported, followed by obesity (n = 16), diabetes (n = 15), CKD (n = 6), COPD (n = 2), cervical cancer (n = 3), and breast cancer (n = 1). The majority (n = 22) reported data on at least one demographic/environmental, lifestyle, or physiological risk factor but these data varied greatly. Conclusions:Most studies collected data on a combination of hypertension, diabetes, and obesity and few studies collected data on respiratory diseases and cancer. Although most collected data on different risk factors the methodologies varied greatly. Several methodological limitations were found including low recruitment rate, low retention rate, and lack of validated and standardized data collection. Our results could guide potential collaborations and maximize impact to improve our global understanding of NCDs (and their risk factors) in SSA and also to inform future research, as well as policies.

Project description:AIM:To estimate the economic burden of common health problems associated with pregnancy and childbirth, such as incontinence, mental health problems, or gestational diabetes, excluding acute complications of labour or birth, or severe acute adverse maternal outcomes. METHODS:Searches for relevant studies were carried out to November 2019 in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and EconLit databases. After initial screening, all results were reviewed for inclusion by two authors. An adapted version of a previously developed checklist for cost-of-illness studies was used for quality appraisal. All costs were converted to 2018 Euro using national consumer price indices and purchasing power parity conversion factors. RESULTS:Thirty-eight relevant studies were identified, some of which reported incremental costs for more than one health problem (16 gestational diabetes, 13 overweight/obesity, 8 mental health, 4 hypertensive disorders, 2 nausea and vomiting, 2 epilepsy, 1 intimate partner violence). A high level of heterogeneity was observed in both the methods used, and the incremental cost estimates obtained for each morbidity. Average incremental costs tended to be higher in studies that modelled a hypothetical cohort of women using data from a range of sources (compared to analyses of primary data), and in studies set in the United States. No studies that examined the economic burden of some common pregnancy-related morbidities, such as incontinence, pelvic girdle pain, or sexual health problems, were identified. CONCLUSION:Our findings indicate that maternal morbidity is associated with significant costs to health systems and society, but large gaps remain in the evidence base for the economic burden of some common health problems associated with pregnancy and childbirth. More research is needed to examine the economic burden of a range of common maternal health problems, and future research should adopt consistent methodological approaches to ensure comparability of results.

Project description:BackgroundSnakebite envenoming, a high priority Neglected Tropical Disease categorized by the World Health Organization (WHO), has been considered as a poverty-related disease that requires greater global awareness and collaboration to establish strategies that effectively decrease economic burdens. This prompts the need for a comprehensive review of the global literature that summarizes the global economic burden and a description of methodology details and their variation. This study aimed to systematically identify studies on cost of illness and economic evaluation associated with snakebites, summarize study findings, and evaluate their methods to provide recommendations for future studies.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Econlit for articles published from inception to 31 July 2019. Original articles reporting costs or full economic evaluation related with snakebites were included. The methods and reporting quality were assessed. Costs were presented in US dollars (US$) in 2018.ResultsTwenty-three cost of illness studies and three economic evaluation studies related to snakebites were included. Majority of studies (18/23, 78.26%) were conducted in Low- and Middle-income countries. Most cost of illness studies (82.61%) were done using hospital-based data of snakebite patients. While, four studies (17.39%) estimated costs of snakebites in communities. Five studies (21.74%) used societal perspective estimating both direct and indirect costs. Only one study (4.35%) undertook incidence-based approach to estimate lifetime costs. Only three studies (13.04%) estimated annual national economic burdens of snakebite which varied drastically from US$126 319 in Burkina Faso to US$13 802 550 in Sri Lanka. Quality of the cost of illness studies were varied and substantially under-reported. All three economic evaluation studies were cost-effectiveness analysis using decision tree model. Two of them assessed cost-effectiveness of having full access to antivenom and reported cost-effective findings.ConclusionsEconomic burdens of snakebite were underestimated and not extensively studied. To accurately capture the economic burdens of snakebites at both the global and local level, hospital data should be collected along with community survey and economic burdens of snakebites should be estimated both in short-term and long-term period to incorporate the lifetime costs and productivity loss due to premature death, disability, and consequences of snakebites.

Project description:Typhoid fever is responsible for a substantial health burden in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). New means of prevention became available with the prequalification of typhoid conjugate vaccines (TCV) by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2018. Policymakers require evidence to inform decisions about TCV. The economic burden related to typhoid fever can be considerable, both for healthcare providers and households, and should be accounted for in the decision-making process. We aimed to understand the breadth of the evidence on the cost of typhoid fever by undertaking a scoping review of the published literature. We searched scientific databases with terms referring to typhoid fever cost of illness to identify published studies for the period January 1st 2000 to May 24th 2024. We also conferred with stakeholders engaged in typhoid research to identify studies pending completion or publication. We identified 13 published studies reporting empirical data for 11 countries, most of them located in Asia. The total cost of a typhoid episode ranged from $23 in India to $884 in Indonesia (current 2022 United States Dollar [USD]). Household expenditures related to typhoid fever were characterized as catastrophic in 9 studies. We identified 5 studies pending completion or publication, which will provide evidence for 9 countries, most of them located in Africa. Alignment in study characteristics and methods would increase the usefulness of the evidence generated and facilitate cross-country and regional comparison. The gap in evidence across regions should be mitigated when studies undertaken in African countries are published. There remains a lack of evidence on the cost to treat typhoid in the context of increasing antimicrobial resistance. Decision-makers should consider the available evidence on the economic burden of typhoid, particularly as risk factors related to antimicrobial resistance and climate change increase typhoid risk. Additional studies should address typhoid illness costs, using standardized methods and accounting for the costs of antimicrobial resistance.