Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jun;42(6):663-678.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-024-01366-y. Epub 2024 Mar 26.

Developing a Program Costs Checklist of Digital Health Interventions: A Scoping Review and Empirical Case Study

Zareen Abbas Khan  1   2 , Kristian Kidholm  3 , Sindre Andre Pedersen  4 , Silje Marie Haga  5 , Filip Drozd  5 , Thea Sundrehagen  5 , Ellen Olavesen  5 , Vidar Halsteinli  6
Affiliations

Developing a Program Costs Checklist of Digital Health Interventions: A Scoping Review and Empirical Case Study

Zareen Abbas Khan et al. Pharmacoeconomics. 2024 Jun.

Abstract

Introduction: The rate of development and complexity of digital health interventions (DHIs) in recent years has to some extent outpaced the methodological development in economic evaluation and costing. Particularly, the choice of cost components included in intervention or program costs of DHIs have received scant attention. The aim of this study was to build a literature-informed checklist of program cost components of DHIs. The checklist was next tested by applying it to an empirical case, Mamma Mia, a DHI developed to prevent perinatal depression.

Method: A scoping review with a structured literature search identified peer-reviewed literature from 2010 to 2022 that offers guidance on program costs of DHIs. Relevant guidance was summarized and extracted elements were organized into categories of main cost components and their associated activities following the standard three-step approach, that is, activities, resource use and unit costs.

Results: Of the 3448 records reviewed, 12 studies met the criteria for data extraction. The main cost categories identified were development, research, maintenance, implementation and health personnel involvement (HPI). Costs are largely considered to be context-specific, may decrease as the DHI matures and vary with number of users. The five categories and their associated activities constitute the checklist. This was applied to estimate program costs per user for Mamma Mia Self-Guided and Blended, the latter including additional guidance from public health nurses during standard maternal check-ups. Excluding research, the program cost per mother was more than double for Blended compared with Self-Guided (€140.5 versus €56.6, 2022 Euros) due to increased implementation and HPI costs. Including research increased the program costs to €190.8 and €106.9, respectively. One-way sensitivity analyses showed sensitivity to changes in number of users, lifespan of the app, salaries and license fee.

Conclusion: The checklist can help increase transparency of cost calculation and improve future comparison across studies.

Plain language summary

Estimating program or intervention costs of digital health interventions (DHIs) can be challenging without a checklist. We reviewed scientific literature to identify key cost categories of DHIs: development, research, maintenance, implementation and health personnel involvement. We also summarized relevant information regarding resource use and unit cost for each of the aforementioned categories. Applying this checklist to Mamma Mia, a DHI aimed at preventing perinatal depression, we find that the total cost per user for Mamma Mia Self-Guided is €106.9 and for Mamma Mia Blended is €190.8. Our checklist enhances visibility of DHI cost components and can aid analysts in better estimating costs for economic evaluations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Analytical approach. DHIs digital health interventions
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
PRISMA flow chart of scoping review
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Guo C, Ashrafian H, Ghafur S, Fontana G, Gardner C, Prime M. Challenges for the evaluation of digital health solutions—a call for innovative evidence generation approaches. NPJ Digit Med. 2020;3:110. doi: 10.1038/s41746-020-00314-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Murray E, Hekler EB, Andersson G, Collins LM, Doherty A, Hollis C, et al. Evaluating digital health interventions: key questions and approaches. Am J Prev Med. 2016;51(5):843–851. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.06.008. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mitchell LM, Joshi U, Patel V, Lu C, Naslund JA. Economic evaluations of internet-based psychological interventions for anxiety disorders and depression: a systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2021;284:157–182. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.01.092. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Donker T, Blankers M, Hedman E, Ljótsson B, Petrie K, Christensen H. Economic evaluations of Internet interventions for mental health: a systematic review. Psychol Med. 2015;45(16):3357–3376. doi: 10.1017/S0033291715001427. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kidholm K, Kristensen MBD. A scoping review of economic evaluations alongside randomised controlled trials of home monitoring in chronic disease management. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2018;16(2):167–176. doi: 10.1007/s40258-017-0351-9. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources