↓ Skip to main content

Economic evaluations of HBV testing and treatment strategies and applicability to low and middle-income countries

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Economic evaluations of HBV testing and treatment strategies and applicability to low and middle-income countries
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2778-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shevanthi Nayagam, Elisa Sicuri, Maud Lemoine, Philippa Easterbrook, Lesong Conteh, Timothy B. Hallett, Mark Thursz

Abstract

Many people living with chronic HBV infection remain undiagnosed until later stages of disease. Increasing testing and treatment rates form part of the strategy to respond to the WHO goal of eliminating viral hepatitis as a public health threat by 2030. However, achieving these ambitious targets is dependent on finding effective and cost-effective methods of scale up strategies. The aim of this study was to undertake a narrative review of the literature on economic evaluations of testing and treatment for HBV infection, to help inform the development of the 2017 WHO Hepatitis Testing Guidelines. We undertook a focussed literature review for economic evaluations on testing for HBV accompanied by antiviral treatment. The search was carried out in Pubmed and included only articles published after 2000 and written in English. We narratively synthesise the results and discuss the key drivers of cost-effectiveness and their applicability to low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Nine published studies were included in this review, only one of which was performed in a low or middle-income setting in West Africa. Eight studies were performed in high-income settings, seven among high risk groups and one among the general population. The studies were heterogeneous in many respects including the population and testing strategy under consideration, model structure and baselines parameters, willingness to pay thresholds and outcome measures used. However, most studies found HBV testing and treatment to be cost-effective, even at low HBsAg prevalence levels. Currently economic evaluations of HBV testing and treatment strategies in LMICs is lacking, therefore limiting the ability to provide formal recommendations on the basis of cost-effectiveness alone. Further implementation research is needed in order to help guide national policy planning.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 22%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Researcher 7 11%
Other 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 18 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 6%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 21 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 27 November 2017.
All research outputs
#3,874,795
of 14,600,279 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,207
of 5,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,058
of 317,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#174
of 663 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,600,279 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,457 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 317,970 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 663 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 73% of its contemporaries.