Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Collecting unit cost data in multicentre studies. Creating comparable methods.

Sarah Wordsworth1, Anne Ludbrook, Fergus Caskey

  • 1Health Economics Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. sarah.wordsworth@dphpc.ox.ac.uk

The European Journal of Health Economics : HEPAC : Health Economics in Prevention and Care
|March 18, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Stereotactic radiotherapy for neovascular age related macular degeneration: year 3 and 4 extended follow up results of a randomised, double masked, sham controlled, device trial (STAR).

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2026
Same author

The cost and cost-effectiveness of whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing: a systematic literature review.

European journal of human genetics : EJHG·2026
Same author

Social impact bonds: opportunities for funding health promotion and disease prevention.

BMC public health·2026
Same author

Towards a Multi-sectoral Approach to Population Health: A Scoping Review of Cross-sectoral Evaluations of Health Interventions.

Applied health economics and health policy·2026
Same author

Is liquid biopsy a cost-effective method to diagnose Burkitt Lymphoma in children and young adults? A health economic evaluation in Tanzania.

BMC medicine·2026
Same author

Reduction in sugar intake after the introduction of minimum unit pricing for alcohol in Scotland: a difference-in-differences analysis.

The American journal of clinical nutrition·2025

Comparing dialysis costing methods in Europe, this study found bottom-up approaches offer greater consistency and transparency for health care technologies, especially those with high staff or overhead costs.

Area of Science:

  • Health Economics
  • Health Services Research
  • Comparative Effectiveness Research

Background:

  • International comparisons of health care services necessitate comparable cost data.
  • Accurate costing is crucial for evaluating health technologies like dialysis therapy across different European healthcare systems.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare top-down and bottom-up unit cost data collection methods for dialysis therapy in Europe.
  • To assess the consistency and transparency of cost results across different countries and dialysis modalities.
  • To determine the optimal costing approach for enhancing the comparability of health technology cost-effectiveness.

Main Methods:

  • A comparative analysis of top-down and bottom-up costing methodologies was conducted.
  • Unit cost data for peritoneal dialysis and haemodialysis were collected across European centers.

Related Experiment Videos

  • The study evaluated the agreement and differences in cost results between the two approaches.

    • Main Results:

    • Greater agreement between costing approaches was observed for peritoneal dialysis (differences of €91-€1,687 per patient per year) compared to haemodialysis (€333-€7,314 per patient per year).
    • Haemodialysis cost discrepancies were largest when dialysis units were integrated within larger hospitals.
    • The choice of costing method depends on the specific health technology and healthcare system structure.

    Conclusions:

    • Bottom-up costing is recommended for technologies with substantial staff or overhead components, shared resources, or where costs are not routinely allocated to the intervention level.
    • Adopting a consistent and transparent costing approach, particularly bottom-up, can significantly improve the comparability of cost-effectiveness results across European healthcare systems.
    • This enhanced comparability supports more reliable international evaluations of health care technologies.