Cited by 438Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityFungal Infections and StudiesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 11 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Estimation of Direct Healthcare Costs of Fungal Diseases in the United States

Open access
Benedict, Kaitlin, Jackson, Brendan R, Chiller, Tom, Beer, Karlyn D·2019·Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Background: Fungal diseases range from relatively minor superficial and mucosal infections to severe, life-threatening systemic infections. Delayed diagnosis and treatment can lead to poor patient outcomes and high medical costs. The overall burden of fungal diseases in the United States is challenging to quantify because they are likely substantially underdiagnosed. Methods: To estimate total national direct medical costs associated with fungal diseases from a healthcare payer perspective, we used insurance claims data from the Truven Health MarketScan® 2014 Research Databases, combined with hospital discharge data from the 2014 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample and outpatient visit data from the 2005–2014 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. All costs were adjusted to 2017 dollars. Results: We estimate that fungal diseases cost more than $7.2 billion in 2017, including $4.5 billion from 75,055 hospitalizations and $2.6 billion from 8,993,230 outpatient visits. Hospitalizations for Candida infections (n=26,735, total cost $1.4 billion) and Aspergillus infections (n=14,820, total cost $1.2 billion) accounted for the highest total hospitalization costs of any disease. Over half of outpatient visits were for dermatophyte infections (4,981,444 visits, total cost $802 million), and 3,639,037 visits occurred for non-invasive candidiasis (total cost $1.6 billion). Conclusions: Fungal diseas…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/cid/ciy776

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

25 Own result · 9 Own interpretation · 3 No full text of the sources · 2 Own method · 1 Supported · 1 Partly supported · 1 Sources not found · 1 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured

Verify all 1 references — free account

Show all 26 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 16
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 1
17 of 17
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Average costs per hospitalization and outpatient visit derived from the MarketScan databases are representative of national average costs for the corresponding payer groups.

    “We used the Truven Health MarketScan® 2014 Research Databases to obtain the average cost per hospitalization and outpatient visit among patients with private insurance, Medicare supplemental insurance, and Medicaid.”
    “To estimate total national costs by disease from a healthcare payer perspective, we multiplied the average cost per hospitalization and outpatient visit from MarketScan by the corresponding proportion of payers and the total number of hospitalizations and outpatient visits in the HCUP NIS and NAMCS/NHAMCS, respectively.”
1 of 1

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

7 of 7

Citations

Cites

Show all 41 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Benedict, K., Jackson, B. R., Chiller, T., & Beer, K. D.
Affiliations
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
Corresponding author
Benedict, Kaitlin
Venue
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Published
2018-09-10
Volume
68
Issue
11
Pages
1791-1797
ISSN
  • 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-6591
OpenAlex
W2891999566
Cited by
438
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 73 · 2023: 72 · 2022: 72 · 2021: 63 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 3
FWCI
24.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • Clinical Infectious Diseases (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (CC999999)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Fungal Infections and Studies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
fungal diseases, direct healthcare costs, economic burden, hospital costs, outpatient visits, candidiasis, aspergillosis, dermatophytosis, underdiagnosis, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey
MeSH terms
Hospitalization, Humans, Inpatients, Insurance Claim Review, Mycoses, Outpatients, United States, Health Care Costs, Cost of Illness, Health Care Surveys

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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