CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 29Mental Health Treatment and AccessHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHealthcare Systems and Reforms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Economic burden of the therapeutic management of mental illnesses and its effect on household purchasing power

Open access
Agboola, Afis A., Esan, Oluwaseun T., Afolabi, Oluwasegun T., Soyinka, Taiwo A., Oluwaranti, Adedunmola O., Adetayo, Adeniji·2018·PLOS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0202396PMC PMC6130881
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Cost or burden of illness studies for mental illnesses has helped define the magnitude of their negative effects on the household, community and national economy. Despite its many benefits, there is a paucity of these studies among Nigerians being managed for mental illnesses. This study was aimed at assessing the economic burden of mental illnesses and its effect on household purchasing power. The study was descriptive cross-sectional in design conducted among 284 out-patients with five categories of mental illnesses at the Neuropsychiatric Hospital, Aro recruited via a systematic sampling technique. Data collection was quantitative using a semi-structured interviewer-administered tool. Participants provided the actual direct costs and estimates of indirect costs incurred during their most recent inpatient admission and their first clinic visit after discharge. Parametric and non-parametric statistical tests were conducted on the direct and estimated indirect costs respectively after testing them for normality using the Q-Q plot with statistical significance determined at p<0.05. Almost 96% of respondents finance their healthcare costs by themselves or their family with >50% earning <US$1.8 per day. Their mean direct and estimated indirect costs were (US$23.1±US$11.3 and US$15±US$28). There were no statistically significant differences in the mean direct and estimated indirect costs incurred by participants across the categories of mental illnesses. A significantly higher proportion of participants could afford the essential goods (88%) compared to those who could afford luxurious goods (29%) with p<0.001. The mean direct costs incurred by those who could afford the essential and luxurious goods were significantly higher than those who could not following a t-test. The median estimated indirect costs incurred by those who could not afford luxurious goods differed significantly from those who could with the Mann Whitney U-test. Participants with mental illnesses face a high economic burden in managing their condition with the majority unable to afford luxurious goods. Affordability was also associated with incurring more direct costs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0202396

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. JE Segel, 2006, Cost-of-illness studies—a primer, RTI-UNC Center of Excellence in Health Promotion Economics, 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 29

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Agboola, A. A., Esan, O. T., Afolabi, O. T., Soyinka, T. A., Oluwaranti, A. O., & Adetayo, A.
Affiliations
Obafemi Awolowo University (NG)
Corresponding author
Esan, Oluwaseun T.
ORCID
Venue
PLOS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2018-09-10
Volume
13
Issue
9
Pages
e0202396
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0202396
PMC
PMC6130881
OpenAlex
W2891166813
Cited by
29
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Greater South Information System
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Healthcare Systems and Reforms
Keywords
economic burden of mental illness, household purchasing power, out-of-pocket health care costs, direct costs, indirect costs, psychiatric treatment, outpatients, Nigeria
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Costs and Cost Analysis, Cross-Sectional Studies, Family Characteristics, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Cost of Illness

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