↓ Skip to main content

Development and validation of a claims-based measure as an indicator for disease status in patients with multiple sclerosis treated with disease-modifying drugs

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Development and validation of a claims-based measure as an indicator for disease status in patients with multiple sclerosis treated with disease-modifying drugs
Published in
BMC Neurology, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12883-017-0887-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Munsell, Molly Frean, Joseph Menzin, Amy L. Phillips

Abstract

Administrative healthcare claims data provide a mechanism for assessing and monitoring multiple sclerosis (MS) disease status across large, clinically representative "real-world" populations. The estimation of MS disease status using administrative claims can be a challenge, however, due to a lack of detailed clinical information. Retrospective claims analyses in MS have traditionally used rates of MS relapses to approximate disease status. Healthcare costs may be alternate, broader claims-based indicators of disease activity because costs reflect multiple facets of care of patients with MS, and there is a strong correlation between quality of life of patients with MS and costs of the disease. This study developed, tested, and validated a healthcare cost-based measure to serve as an indicator of overall disease status in patients with MS treated with disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) utilizing administrative claims. Using IMS Health Real World Data Adjudicated Claims - US data (January 2006-June 2013), a negative binomial regression predicted annual all-cause medical costs. Coefficients reaching statistical significance (p < 0.05) and increasing costs by ≥5% were selected for inclusion into an MS-specific severity score (scale of 0 to 100). Components of the score included rehabilitation services, altered mental state, pain, disability, stiffness, balance disorder, urinary incontinence, numbness, malaise/fatigue, and infections. Coefficient weights represented each predictor's contribution. The predictive model was derived using 50% of a random sample and tested/validated using the remaining 50%. Average overall predicted annual total medical cost was $11,134 (development sample, n = 11,384, vs. $10,528 actual) and $11,303 (validation sample, n = 11,385, vs. $10,620 actual). The model had consistent bias (approximately +$600 or +6% of actual costs) for both samples. In the validation sample, mean MS disease status scores were 0.24, 8.95, and 21.77 for low, medium, and high tertiles, respectively. Mean costs were most accurately predicted among less severe patients ($5243 predicted vs. $5233 actual cost for lowest tertile). The algorithm developed in this study provides an initial step to helping understand and potentially predict cost changes for a commercially insured MS population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Researcher 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 5 7%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 17 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 15%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 5%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 21 28%
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 08 June 2017.
All research outputs
#13,865,100
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#1,167
of 2,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,302
of 317,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#25
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,456 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 317,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.