MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413303925 · doi:10.1002/acr.25627

Economic Burden of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries: Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2025· review· en· W4413303925 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tadesse Gebrye, Chidozie Emmanuel Mbada, C. Fatoye, Faatihah Niyi‐Odumosu, Ushotanefe Useh, Zalmaï Hakimi, Francis Fatoye

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisRheumatoid arthritisLow and middle income countriesMedicineSystematic reviewEconomicsMEDLINEInternal medicinePolitical scienceEconomic growthDeveloping country

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the economic impact of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on households, health systems, and society in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: Electronic databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL were searched using keywords related to RA and cost of illness. Eligible studies were required to report RA-related costs, be conducted in LMICs, and be published in English. Quality appraisal of the included studies was conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. A narrative synthesis and meta-analysis of findings was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 5,134 studies was initially identified for screening. After removing 1,028 duplicates, 50 studies were selected for full-text review, and 15 met the eligibility criteria and were therefore included in the review. These studies, published between 2007 and 2024, were conducted in various countries, including Turkey (n = 3), China (n = 2), and one study each from Thailand, Hungary, Mexico, Colombia, Morocco, Pakistan, India, Romania, Brazil, and Argentina. Nine studies adopted a societal perspective, whereas six used a health care perspective. The total sample size was 218,575 participants, with individual study sizes ranged from 62 to 209,292. Average annual direct costs per patient ranged from US$523 to US$2,837.90, and indirect costs ranged from US$81.80 to US$2,463.40. The pooled average annual costs for outpatients, inpatients, and medical costs were US$517.72 (95% confidence interval [CI] $3.35-$1,032.09), US$543.88 (95% CI US$499.51-US$588.24), and US$3,379.83 (95% CI US$3,137.58-US$3,622.08), respectively. CONCLUSION: RA poses a significant economic challenge in LMICs, where limited health care resources and high treatment costs make care unaffordable for many. This review uniquely underscores that enhancing treatment access and optimizing resource use can reduce both medical and productivity losses, improving patient outcomes and strengthening economic resilience.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.029
Bibliometrics0.0120.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.327 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & Research→Same topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies→French-language works237,207→