Costing Methods for Artificial Intelligence: Systematic Review and Recommended Cost Inventory for in Health Technology Assessment
Lee, J. T.; Shen, T. K.-B.; Liu, V. T.-N.; Chen, T. H.-H.; Lee, C.-C.; Lu, C.; Huang, C.-W.; Atun, R.
Show abstract
Economic evaluations of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare are expanding rapidly, yet underlying costing methods remains heterogenous, and frequently incomplete for health technology assessment (HTA) and policy decision-making. In our systematic review of 55 studies published between 2010 and 2025, we found that fewer than half of the studies reported explicit costing methods; most pricing analyses failed to describe the basis of fees, subscription terms, or duration of coverage; and few analyses distinguished between average and incremental costs or accounted for economies of scale. Lifecycle expenditures--including development, validation, integration, maintenance, retraining, and decommissioning--were largely omitted, while electricity consumption, data hosting, and cloud infrastructure costs were almost never considered. Sensitivity analysis was the exception rather than the norm, and reporting of cost offsets such as reduced hospital admissions or workforce time savings was inconsistent. To address these gaps, we propose a 20-item reporting checklist to standardise the costing and pricing of AI interventions. The checklist complements existing HTA frameworks while capturing features unique to AI, such as continuous retraining, reliance on data infrastructure, and recurrent maintenance. We also introduce an AI Costing Inventory and Calculator that operationalises a lifecycle approach, enabling systematic recording of resource use, unit costs, inflation adjustments, and total and incremental costs, including offsets. These tools extend the emerging CHEERS-AI reporting framework by embedding a lifecycle perspective into costing, thereby enabling consistent estimation of resource and cos components and strengthening the methodological foundations of AI economic evaluation for policy use.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Emerging Therapies for COVID-19: the value of information from more clinical trials 90%
- Validity, Reliability, and Framing Effects in Equity-Efficiency Trade-Off Studies: A Systematic Review 89%
- The roadmap for implementing value based healthcare in European university hospitals - consensus report and recommendations 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Methodological Considerations for Linking Household and Healthcare Provider Data for Estimating Effective Coverage: A Systematic Review 92%
- Purchasing high-cost medical equipment in hospitals: A systematic review 92%
- Development and validation of an algorithm to estimate the risk of severe complications of COVID-19 to prioritise vaccination 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Educational interventions delivered to prescribing advisers to influence primary care prescribing: a very low-cost pragmatic randomised trial using routine data from OpenPrescribing.net 90%
- Measurement Matters: Changing Penalty Calculations under the Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) Cost Hospitals Millions 90%
- ‘Leading from the front’ implementation strategies increase the success of influenza vaccination drives among healthcare workers: A reanalysis of Systematic Review evidence using Intervention Component Analysis (ICA) and Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- A novel methodology to measure waiting times for community-based specialist care in a public healthcare system 91%
- The Amortization of Funding Gene Therapies: Making the “Intangibles” Tangible for Patients 91%
- Progressivity of out-of-pocket costs under Australia’s universal health care system: a national linked data study 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Low adherence to existing model reporting guidelines by commonly used clinical prediction models 94%
- Clinical Outcomes, Costs, and Cost-effectiveness of Strategies for People Experiencing Sheltered Homelessness During the COVID-19 Pandemic 89%
- Crowdfunding Medical Care: A Comparison of Online Medical Fundraising in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.