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 |
Costs of productivity loss due to occupational cancer in Canada: estimation using claims data from Workers’ Compensation Boards
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Economics Review, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13561-017-0145-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
W. Dominika Wranik, Adam Muir, Min Hu |
| Abstract |
Cancer is a leading cause of illness globally, yet our understanding of the financial implications of cancer caused by working conditions and environments is limited. The goal of this study is to estimate the costs of productivity losses due to occupational cancer in Canada, and to evaluate the factors associated with these costs. Two sources of data are used: (i) Individual level administrative claims data from the Workers Compensation Board of Nova Scotia; and (ii) provincial aggregated cancer claims statistics from the Association of Workers Compensation Boards of Canada. Benefits paid to claimants are based on actuarial estimates of wage-loss, but do not include medical costs that are covered by the Canadian publicly funded healthcare system. Regional claims level data are used to estimate the total and average (per claim) cost of occupational cancer to the insurance system, and to assess which characteristics of the claim/claimant influence costs. Cost estimates from one region are weighted using regional multipliers to adjust for system differences between regions, and extrapolated to estimate national costs of occupational cancer. We estimate that the total cost of occupational cancer to the Workers' Compensation system in Canada between 1996 and 2013 was $1.2 billion. The average annual cost was $68 million. The cancer being identified as asbestos related were significantly positively associated with costs, whereas the age of the claimant was significantly negatively associated with costs. The industry type/region, injury type or part of body affected by cancer were not significant cost determinants. Given the severity of the cancer burden, it is important to understand the financial implications of the disease on workers. Our study shows that productivity losses associated with cancer in the workplace are not negligible, particularly for workers exposed to asbestos. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 13% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 13% |
| Canada | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 8 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 12% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 23 February 2017.
All research outputs
#5,546,457
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#86
of 430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,116
of 422,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#4
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 422,694 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 71% of its contemporaries.