↓ Skip to main content

Medical costs and quality-adjusted life years associated with smoking: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
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.
Title
Medical costs and quality-adjusted life years associated with smoking: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3319-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shari P. Feirman, Allison M. Glasser, Lyubov Teplitskaya, David R. Holtgrave, David B. Abrams, Raymond S. Niaura, Andrea C. Villanti

Abstract

Estimated medical costs ("T") and QALYs ("Q") associated with smoking are frequently used in cost-utility analyses of tobacco control interventions. The goal of this study was to understand how researchers have addressed the methodological challenges involved in estimating these parameters. Data were collected as part of a systematic review of tobacco modeling studies. We searched five electronic databases on July 1, 2013 with no date restrictions and synthesized studies qualitatively. Studies were eligible for the current analysis if they were U.S.-based, provided an estimate for Q, and used a societal perspective and lifetime analytic horizon to estimate T. We identified common methods and frequently cited sources used to obtain these estimates. Across all 18 studies included in this review, 50 % cited a 1992 source to estimate the medical costs associated with smoking and 56 % cited a 1996 study to derive the estimate for QALYs saved by quitting or preventing smoking. Approaches for estimating T varied dramatically among the studies included in this review. T was valued as a positive number, negative number and $0; five studies did not include estimates for T in their analyses. The most commonly cited source for Q based its estimate on the Health Utilities Index (HUI). Several papers also cited sources that based their estimates for Q on the Quality of Well-Being Scale and the EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D). Current estimates of the lifetime medical care costs and the QALYs associated with smoking are dated and do not reflect the latest evidence on the health effects of smoking, nor the current costs and benefits of smoking cessation and prevention. Given these limitations, we recommend that researchers conducting economic evaluations of tobacco control interventions perform extensive sensitivity analyses around these parameter estimates.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 65 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 17%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 20 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 17%
Psychology 8 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 24 36%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 January 2022.
All research outputs
#5,985,264
of 21,446,675 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,336
of 13,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,107
of 280,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,446,675 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,921 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
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 280,341 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.