SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2026
The economic burden of dengue: a systematic literature review of unit costs for non-fatal episodes treated in the formal healthcare system.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The cost-effectiveness of Wolbachia-based biocontrol interventions for dengue: A scoping review of the available evidence.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- When is elimination of an infectious disease cost-effective? An analytical framework to guide elimination priorities.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Early individualized risk prediction using clinical data for children during the febrile phase of dengue in outpatient settings in Vietnam and Thailand.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDengue, a vector-borne disease caused by the dengue virus, has emerged as a global public health concern, given the tenfold rise in reported cases over the last two decades. In light of the upcoming dengue interventions, country-specific cost-of-illness estimates are required to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of new interventions against dengue. This study aims to conduct an updated systematic review of dengue cost-of-illness studies, extracting the relevant data, and conducting regression analysis to explore potential factors contributing to the cost variations among countries.
methodsWe used the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science databases to systematically search for published dengue cost-of-illness studies reporting primary data on costs per dengue episode. A descriptive analysis was conducted across all extracted studies. Linear regression analysis was performed to investigate the association between the GDP per capita and cost per episode. The quality of the included studies was also assessed.
resultsFifty-six studies were included, of which 22 used the societal perspective. The reported total cost per episode ranged from $15.0 for outpatients in Burkina Faso to $9,386.1 for intensive care unit patients in Mexico. Linear regression analysis revealed that the cost of dengue illness varies significantly across countries and regions, and was positively related to the setting’s GDP per capita. The quality assessment demonstrated that improvements are needed in future studies, particularly in the reporting of the methodology.
conclusionsCost of dengue illness varies widely across countries and regions. Future research should focus on understanding other drivers of cost variations beyond GDP per capita to improve the cost estimates for economic evaluation studies. The results presented in this study can serve as crucial input parameters for future economic evaluations, supporting decision makers in allocating resources for dengue intervention programmes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.