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 |
Budget impact analysis on erythropoiesis–stimulating agents use for the management of chemotherapy-induced anaemia in Greece
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-7547-11-16 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eleftheria Nikolaidi, Magdalini Hatzikou, Mary Geitona |
| Abstract |
Chemotherapy-induced anaemia is a common and significant complication of chemotherapy treatment. Blood transfusion and administration of Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents (ESAs) either alone or in combination with iron are the most widely used therapeutic options. In Greece, ESAs are among the top ten therapeutic groups with the highest pharmaceutical expenditure, since they are fully reimbursed by social security funds. The objective of the study is to determine potential cost savings related with the use of biosimilar over originator ESAs for the management of the newly diagnosed chemotherapy-induced anemic patients. |
X Demographics
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Researcher | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 5 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 20% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 12% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Unknown | 6 | 24% |
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 17 July 2013.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#357
of 533 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,333
of 206,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 533 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 206,371 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.