OBJECTIVES: Cost-of-illness (COI) studies conducted from the patient’s perspective provide important information regarding disease burden however there is limited information describing these studies.  We characterize COI studies conducted from the patient’s perspective based on the study design elements and cost burden.  METHODS: We utilize data from a published review of COI methods covering a ten year period from 2005 to 2014.   Articles were included in the study sample if the primary study perspective was the patient perspective and the abstract reported costs from the patient’s perspective. The following information was extracted and reported: cost component, follow-up period, ICD10 aggregate disease category, funding source, continent of origin, publication year, and cost per patient (among studies reporting in US dollars).  Cost components were categorized as: direct, non-medical, indirect, and intangible.  RESULTS: Application of the inclusion criteria resulted in 106 studies (10%) that reported COI from the patient’s perspective.  The proportion that reported direct medical, direct non-medical, indirect, and intangible costs were: 85%, 78%, 51%, and 2%.  The distribution of funding sources for pharmaceutical, government, other, none, and ‘missing’: 14%, 27% 34%, 20%, and 5%. The highest number of studies was from Asia (31%) followed by North America (24%). The lowest number of studies was from South America (4%).  Infectious/parasitic diseases (41%) and neoplasms (11%) were the most commonly studied etiologies.  The follow-up time ranged from 30 days to lifetime. The patient COI ranged from $2 to $79,134  during the 2005-2007 time-period, $7  to $54,871  during the 2008-2010 time-period and $23  to $110,713 during the 2011- 2014 time-period. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one in ten COI studies adopted the patient’s perspective and one in five patient-focused COI studies were unfunded studies.  This study provides important baseline data regarding patient-focused COI studies and can be used to identify gaps in evidence to guide future research.