↓ Skip to main content

Genome sequencing: a systematic review of health economic evidence

Overview of attention for article published in Health Economics Review, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 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
Genome sequencing: a systematic review of health economic evidence
Published in
Health Economics Review, December 2013
DOI 10.1186/2191-1991-3-29
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin Frank, Anne Prenzler, Roland Eils, J-Matthias Graf von der Schulenburg

Abstract

Recently the sequencing of the human genome has become a major biological and clinical research field. However, the public health impact of this new technology with focus on the financial effect is not yet to be foreseen. To provide an overview of the current health economic evidence for genome sequencing, we conducted a thorough systematic review of the literature from 17 databases. In addition, we conducted a hand search. Starting with 5 520 records we ultimately included five full-text publications and one internet source, all focused on cost calculations. The results were very heterogeneous and, therefore, difficult to compare. Furthermore, because the methodology of the publications was quite poor, the reliability and validity of the results were questionable. The real costs for the whole sequencing workflow, including data management and analysis, remain unknown. Overall, our review indicates that the current health economic evidence for genome sequencing is quite poor. Therefore, we listed aspects that needed to be considered when conducting health economic analyses of genome sequencing. Thereby, specifics regarding the overall aim, technology, population, indication, comparator, alternatives after sequencing, outcomes, probabilities, and costs with respect to genome sequencing are discussed. For further research, at the outset, a comprehensive cost calculation of genome sequencing is needed, because all further health economic studies rely on valid cost data. The results will serve as an input parameter for budget-impact analyses or cost-effectiveness analyses.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 3%
United States 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 92 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 20%
Student > Master 18 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Researcher 12 12%
Other 7 7%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 17 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 10%
Chemistry 3 3%
Other 19 20%
Unknown 26 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 December 2013.
All research outputs
#14,768,891
of 22,736,112 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#242
of 421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,548
of 307,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#7
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,736,112 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 307,106 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.