↓ Skip to main content

Overuse in cancer care: do European studies provide information useful to support policies?

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Overuse in cancer care: do European studies provide information useful to support policies?
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12961-018-0287-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roberto Grilli, Valentina Chiesa

Abstract

Health services overuse has been acknowledged as a relevant policy issue. In this study, we assessed the informative value of research on the quality of cancer care, exploring to what extent it is actually concerned with care overuse, thus providing policy-makers with sound estimates of overuse prevalence. We searched Medline for European studies, reporting information on the rate of use of diagnostic or therapeutic procedures/interventions in breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer patients, published in English between 2006 and 2016. Individual studies were classified with regards to their orientation towards overuse according to the quality metrics adopted in assessing rates of use of procedures and interventions.Out of 1882 papers identified, 100 accounting for 94 studies met our eligibility criteria, most of them on breast (n = 38) and colorectal (n = 30) cancer. Of these, 46 (49%) studies relied on process indicators allowing a direct measure of under- or overuse, the latter being addressed in 22 (24%) studies. Search for overuse in patterns of care did not increase over time, with overuse being measured in 24% of the studies published before 2010, and in only 13% of those published in 2015-2016. Information on its prevalence was available only for a relatively limited number of procedures/interventions. Overall, estimates of overuse tended to be higher for diagnostic procedures (median prevalence across all studies, 24%) than for drugs, surgical procedures or radiotherapy (median overuse prevalence always lower than 10%). Despite its increasing policy relevance, overuse is still an often overlooked issue in current European research on the quality of care for cancer patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 22%
Student > Master 7 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Other 5 12%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 11 27%
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 26 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,406,989
of 25,408,670 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#1,021
of 1,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,086
of 344,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#28
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,408,670 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,390 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 344,411 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.