Abstract
Cost of illness studies are a growing area of literature without a common methodology and their usefulness has been debated over the years. A short review carried out of the British studies on mental health revealed differences which originate from three main areas: the epidemiological evidence on prevalence, service contact data and the unit costs employed. This paper outlines the differences found in a number of these studies and we develop a worked example using information from the studies to illustrate the issues of concern. We conclude that the area is problematic in two fashions. Firstly, the results are highly sensitive to epidemiological data and assumptions on costs. Secondly, the assumptions on costs and use of services must always be made explicit.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
