↓ Skip to main content

WTP for a QALY and health states: More money for severer health states?

Overview of attention for article published in Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
102 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
WTP for a QALY and health states: More money for severer health states?
Published in
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1478-7547-11-22
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takeru Shiroiwa, Ataru Igarashi, Takashi Fukuda, Shunya Ikeda

Abstract

In economic evaluation, cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) is generally used as an indicator for cost-effectiveness. Although JPY 5 million to 6 million (USD 60, 000 to 75,000) per QALY is frequently referred to as a threshold in Japan, do all QALYs have the same monetary value?

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 72 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 17 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 31%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 12 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 21 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 January 2019.
All research outputs
#8,533,995
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#263
of 532 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,056
of 212,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 532 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 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 212,459 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.