↓ Skip to main content

Social preferences for health states associated with acute myeloid leukemia for patients undergoing treatment in the United Kingdom

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, April 2018
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 (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Social preferences for health states associated with acute myeloid leukemia for patients undergoing treatment in the United Kingdom
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12955-018-0897-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nacho Castejón, Joseph C. Cappelleri, Jesús Cuervo, Kathryn Lang, Priyanka Mehta, Ruth Mokgokong, Carla Mamolo

Abstract

Health state (HS) utility values for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), a hematological malignancy, are not available in the United Kingdom (UK). This study aims to develop clinically sound HSs for previously untreated patients with AML and to assign utility values based on preferences of the general UK population. This study was conducted in the UK and comprised 2 stages. During the first stage, AML HSs were drafted based on evidence from a literature review of AML clinical and health-related quality-of-life studies (published January 2000-June 2016) and patient-reported outcome measures previously used in this population. A panel of UK hematologists with AML experience validated the clinical relevance and accuracy of the HSs. During the second stage, validated HSs were valued in an elicitation survey with a representative UK population sample using the time trade-off (TTO) method. Descriptive statistics and bivariate tests were obtained and performed. A total of eight HSs were developed and clinically validated, including treatment with chemotherapy, consolidation therapy, transplant, graft-vs-host disease (GvHD), remission, relapse, refractory, and functionally cured. In total, 125 adults participated (mean age, 49.6 years [range, 18-87 years], 52.8% female). Mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) TTO preference values (n = 120), ranked from lowest (worst HS) to highest (best HS) were as follows: refractory - 0.11 (- 0.21 to - 0.01), relapse 0.10 (0.00-0.20), transplant 0.28 (0.20-0.37), treatment with chemotherapy 0.36 (0.28-0.43), GvHD 0.43 (0.36-0.50), consolidation 0.46 (0.40-0.53), remission 0.62 (0.57-0.67), and functionally cured 0.76 (0.72-0.79). Mean (95% CI) visual analog scale preference values followed the same rank order, ranging from 0.15 (0.13-0.17) for refractory to 0.71 (0.68-0.73) for functionally cured. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report utility values for AML from the UK societal perspective. Participants were able to distinguish differences in severity among AML HSs, and preference values were consistent with clinical perception of HS severity. HS preference values observed in this study may be useful in future evaluations of treatment benefit, including cost-effectiveness analyses and improved patient well-being.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 11%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 36 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Psychology 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 36 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 10 June 2019.
All research outputs
#2,781,824
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#203
of 2,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,691
of 326,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#19
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,176 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 326,707 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.