Economic context analysis in mental health care. Usability of health financing and cost of illness studies for international comparisons

10Citations
Citations of this article
38Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This paper discusses an integrated approach to mental health studies on Financing of Illness (FoI) and health accounting, Cost of Illness (CoI) and Burden of Disease (BoD). In order to expand the mental health policies, the following are suggested: (a) an international consensus on the standard scope, methods to collect and to analyse mental health data, as well as to report comparative information; (b) mathematical models are also to be validated and tested in an integrated approach, (c) a better knowledge transfer between clinicians and knowledge engineers, and between researchers and policy makers to translate economic analysis into practice and health planning. © Cambridge University Press 2011.

References Powered by Scopus

HALYs and QALYs and DALYs, oh my: Similarities and differences in summary measures of population health

491Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Guidelines for depot antipsychotic treatment in schizophrenia

323Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The Economic Burden of Chronic Cardiovascular Disease for Major Insurers

115Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

The cost of mental disorders in France

30Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cost of borderline personality disorder in Catalonia (Spain)

29Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Framing of scientific knowledge as a new category of health care research

26Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Salvador-Carulla, L., & Hernández-Peña, P. (2011, March). Economic context analysis in mental health care. Usability of health financing and cost of illness studies for international comparisons. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796011000072

Readers over time

‘12‘13‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23036912

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 15

54%

Researcher 10

36%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

11%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 5

33%

Social Sciences 4

27%

Computer Science 3

20%

Nursing and Health Professions 3

20%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0