Cited by 95Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

The Substance Abuse Services Cost Analysis Program (SASCAP): A new method for estimating drug treatment services costs

Zarkin, Gary A., Dunlap, Laura J., Homsi, Ghada·2004·Evaluation and Program Planning

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2003.09.002

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zarkin, G. A., Dunlap, L. J., & Homsi, G.
Affiliations
RTI International (US)
Corresponding author
Zarkin, Gary A.
Venue
Evaluation and Program Planning
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-02
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
35-43
ISSN
0149-7189 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2087406342
Cited by
95
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Evaluation and Program Planning (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
cost estimation, methadone maintenance treatment, indirect labor costs, nonlabor costs, cost underestimation, cost-effectiveness, treatment planning, patient assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review