↓ Skip to main content

Micro-costing studies in the health and medical literature: protocol for a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
113 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
214 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Micro-costing studies in the health and medical literature: protocol for a systematic review
Published in
Systematic Reviews, May 2014
DOI 10.1186/2046-4053-3-47
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiao Xu, Holly K Grossetta Nardini, Jennifer Prah Ruger

Abstract

Micro-costing is a cost estimation method that allows for precise assessment of the economic costs of health interventions. It has been demonstrated to be particularly useful for estimating the costs of new interventions, for interventions with large variability across providers, and for estimating the true costs to the health system and to society. However, existing guidelines for economic evaluations do not provide sufficient detail of the methods and techniques to use when conducting micro-costing analyses. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to review the current literature on micro-costing studies of health and medical interventions, strategies, and programs to assess the variation in micro-costing methodology and the quality of existing studies. This will inform current practice in conducting and reporting micro-costing studies and lead to greater standardization in methodology in the future.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 214 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 208 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 51 24%
Researcher 37 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 11%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 26 12%
Unknown 40 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 29%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 29 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 8%
Social Sciences 14 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 5%
Other 32 15%
Unknown 47 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 09 February 2021.
All research outputs
#2,667,859
of 25,101,232 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#471
of 2,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,992
of 232,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#7
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,101,232 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,193 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 232,188 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.