cost effect for

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "cost effect for" is not correct in standard written English.
It seems to be a misphrasing, possibly intended to convey a concept related to cost-effectiveness or cost impact. Example: "We need to analyze the cost effect for the new marketing strategy to determine its viability."

⚠ May contain grammatical issues

Science

News & Media

Formal & Business

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

2 human-written examples

He added that sharing development processes at the two companies "means a tremendous cost effect, positive cost effect for Chrysler".

The New York Times

To control the initial cost effect for decision making, we added the initial cost as the basic attribute to the questionnaire.

Journal of Economic Structures

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

58 human-written examples

Key findings for the electricity sector include the importance of a European-wide coordinated electricity grid extension and the exploitation of regional comparative cost effects for renewable sites.

Utilities Policy

The annual cost, effect, and cost effectiveness for all interventions are provided in appendix 6 on bmj.com, and are shown graphically in figures 1 and 2. Costs ($Int) and effects (DALYs averted) have been calculated for a standardised population of one million people to allow for easier comparison between different geographical regions.

British Medical Journal

Irish Aid is committed to support the work of the Government of Malawi as it tackles malnutrition and micronutrient deficiencies and believes that the fortification programme is an accessible and cost effect mechanism for achieving this goal", explained Dr. O'Neill.

Unicef

However, a positive effect of inter-cooling was also found for all the coal cases, while a negative cost effect was found for the natural gas case.

Chemical Engineering Research and Design

More precisely, our model reveals that the so-called raise rivals' cost effect only occurs for a specific range of health care marginal cost.

Health Economics Review

Because the participation fractions varied widely across countries, locally conducted trials are necessary to estimate the likely effect and cost effectiveness for a given country.

BMC Cancer

A summary of the results including the cost, effect, incremental cost and incremental effect for each strategy is presented in Table 5.

BMC Infectious Diseases

The cost-effectiveness acceptability curves in figure 2 summarise the robustness of the model regarding uncertainty estimation of the programme cost and effect for each treatment strategy.

Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation

Biennial strategies 50-69, 45-69 or annual 45-69, 40-69 and 40-74 were selected as cost-effective for both effect measures (YL or QALYs).

BMC Cancer

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When discussing financial or economic impacts, use precise and well-established phrases such as "cost impact of", "economic consequences of", or "financial implications of" to ensure clarity and credibility.

Common error

Avoid using the phrase "cost effect for" in formal writing. This phrasing is generally considered grammatically incorrect. Instead, opt for more accurate alternatives like "cost impact of" or "cost-effectiveness of" to maintain grammatical correctness and clarity.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "cost effect for" attempts to link the concept of cost with its resulting effect. However, based on Ludwig AI, this construction is grammatically questionable and not standard in formal English writing.

Expression frequency: Rare

Frequent in

Science

33%

News & Media

33%

Formal & Business

33%

Less common in

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Reference

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "cost effect for" is generally considered grammatically incorrect in standard English. While it might appear in some contexts, Ludwig AI indicates that it's better to use alternatives like "cost impact of" or "cost-effectiveness of" for clarity and correctness. These alternatives more accurately convey the intended meaning and are more suitable for professional and academic writing. Remember to consider the specific context when choosing the most appropriate alternative to ensure precise communication.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

cost impact of

Focuses on the direct influence that cost has on a particular outcome or situation.

cost implications of

Highlights the consequences and results of specific costs.

economic consequences of

Emphasizes the broader financial and economic results tied to a specific action or decision.

financial implications of

Highlights the monetary results and risks associated with a certain activity or choice.

cost influence on

Highlights how costs shape or determine a certain outcome or aspect.

price effect of

Concentrates on the influence of pricing on consumer behavior or market dynamics.

cost ramifications of

Similar to implications, but suggests more far-reaching and complex consequences related to expenses.

budgetary impact of

Focuses on how costs affect budgets and financial planning processes.

financial repercussions of

Suggests serious and often negative financial outcomes resulting from a cost-related event or decision.

fiscal impact of

Used in the context of government or public finance, addressing the effects of cost on government revenue and spending.

FAQs

What is a more grammatically correct alternative to "cost effect for"?

More appropriate alternatives include "cost impact of", "cost-effectiveness of", or "economic consequences of", depending on the intended meaning.

How does "cost impact of" differ from "cost-effectiveness of"?

"Cost impact of" refers to the overall influence that costs have on a particular situation, while "cost-effectiveness of" specifically assesses the relationship between the cost of an intervention and its outcomes.

In what contexts might I use "financial implications of" instead of "cost effect for"?

Use "financial implications of" when discussing the monetary results and risks associated with a specific action or decision. This is generally more precise and grammatically sound than "cost effect for".

Is "cost effect for" ever considered acceptable in certain dialects or informal contexts?

While it might appear in informal speech, "cost effect for" is generally not considered standard English. For professional or academic writing, it is best to avoid this phrase and use more established alternatives like "cost impact of" or "cost-effectiveness of".