↓ Skip to main content

Disease control programme support costs: an update of WHO-CHOICE methodology, price databases and quantity assumptions

Overview of attention for article published in Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Disease control programme support costs: an update of WHO-CHOICE methodology, price databases and quantity assumptions
Published in
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12962-017-0083-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melanie Y. Bertram, Karin Stenberg, Callum Brindley, Jina Li, Juliana Serje, Rory Watts, Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer

Abstract

Estimating health care costs, either in the context of understanding resource utilization in the implementation of a health plan, or in the context of economic evaluation, has become a common activity of health planners, health technology assessment agencies and academic groups. However, data sources for costs outside of direct service delivery are often scarce. WHO-CHOICE produces global price databases and guidance on quantity assumptions to support country level costing exercises. This paper presents updates to the WHO-CHOICE methodology and price databases for programme costs. We collated publicly available databases for 14 non-traded cost variables, as well as a set of traded items used within health systems (traded goods are those which can be purchased from anywhere in the world, whereas non-traded goods are those which must be produced locally, such as human resources). Within each of the variables, missing data was present for some proportion of the WHO member states. For each variables statistical or econometric models were used to model prices for each of the 194 WHO member states in 2010 International Dollars. Literature reviews were used to update quantity assumptions associated with each variable to contribute to the support costs of disease control programmes. A full database of prices for disease control programme support costs is available for country-specific costing purposes. Human resources are the largest driver of disease control programme support costs, followed by supervision costs. Despite major advances in the availability of data since the previous version of this work, there are still some limitations in data availability to respond to the needs of those wishing to develop cost and cost-effectiveness estimates. Greater attention to programme support costs in cost data collection activities would contribute to an understanding of how these costs contribute to quality of health service delivery and should be encouraged.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 26 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 15%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 29 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 January 2023.
All research outputs
#5,049,724
of 24,716,872 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#173
of 492 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,369
of 333,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,716,872 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 492 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,179 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.