↓ Skip to main content

Assessing key cost drivers associated with caring for chronic kidney disease patients

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#2 of 5,494)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
55 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Assessing key cost drivers associated with caring for chronic kidney disease patients
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1922-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Damien, Holly J. Lanham, Murali Parthasarathy, Nikhil L. Shah

Abstract

To examine key factors influencing chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients' total expenditure and offer recommendations on how to reduce total cost of CKD care without compromising quality. Using the 2002-2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) data, our cross-sectional study analyzed 197 patient records-79 patients with one record and 59 with two entries per patient (138 unique patients). We used three patient groups, based on international statistical classification of diseases version 9 code for condition (ICD9CODX) classification, to focus inference from the analysis: (a) non-dialysis dependent CKD, (b) dialysis and (c) transplant. Covariate information included region, demographic, co-morbid conditions and types of services. We used descriptive methods and multivariate generalized linear models to understand the impact of cost drivers. We compared actual and predicted CKD cost of care data using a hold-out sample of nine, randomly selected patients to validate the models. Total costs were significantly affected by treatment type, with dialysis being significantly higher than non-dialysis and transplant groups. Costs were highest in the West region of the U.S. Average costs for patients with public insurance were significantly higher than patients with private insurance (p < .0743), and likewise, for patients with co-morbid conditions over those without co-morbid conditions (p < .001). Managing CKD patients both before and after the onset of dialysis treatment and managing co-morbid conditions in individuals with CKD are potential sources of substantial cost savings in the care of CKD patients. Comparing total costs pre and post the United States Affordable Care Act could provide invaluable insights into managing the cost-quality tradeoff in CKD care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 109 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 20%
Lecturer 19 17%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Researcher 9 8%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 21 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 37 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 20%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 6%
Psychology 5 5%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 24 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 434. 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 11 January 2019.
All research outputs
#30,143
of 15,922,255 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2
of 5,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,446
of 388,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 427 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,922,255 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,494 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 388,097 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 427 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.