The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Health Economic Evaluations of Cancer in Brazil: A Systematic Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Public Health, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00205 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alessandro G. Campolina, Tania Y. Yuba, Tassia C. Decimoni, Roseli Leandro, Maria del Pilar Estevez Diz, Hillegonda M. D. Novaes, Patrícia C. de Soárez |
| Abstract |
Background: A large number of health economic evaluation (HEE) studies have been published in developed countries. However, Brazilian HEE literature in oncology has not been studied. To investigate whether the scientific literature has provided a set of HEE in oncology capable of supporting decision making in the Brazilian context. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify and characterize studies in this field. We searched multiple databases selecting partial and full HEE studies in oncology (1998-2013). Results: Fifty-five articles were reviewed, of these, 33 (60%) were full health economic evaluations. Type of cancers most frequently studied were: breast (38.2%), cervical (14.6%), lung (10.9%) and colorectal (9.1%). Procedures (47.3%) were the technologies most frequently evaluated. In terms of the intended purposes of the technologies, most (63.6%) were treatments. The majority of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) reported have been below the cost-effectiveness threshold suggested by the World Health Organization (WHO). Conclusions: There has been an increase in the number of HEEs related to cancer in Brazil. These studies may support decision-making processes regarding the coverage of and reimbursement of healthcare technologies for cancer treatment in Brazil. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 18% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 7% |
| Researcher | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 16 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 17 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 July 2018.
All research outputs
#17,985,001
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#5,159
of 10,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,743
of 330,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#71
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,418 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,334 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.