↓ Skip to main content

Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
111 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
234 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
Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2011
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-11-247
Pubmed ID
Authors

Albert Nienhaus, Anja Schablon, José Torres Costa, Roland Diel

Abstract

Interferon-γ release assays (IGRAs) for TB have the potential to replace the tuberculin skin test (TST) in screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). The higher per-test cost of IGRAs may be compensated for by lower post-screening costs (medical attention, chest x-rays and chemoprevention), given the higher specificity of the new tests as compared to that of the conventional TST. We conducted a systematic review of all publications that have addressed the cost or cost-effectiveness of IGRAs. The objective of this report was to undertake a structured review and critical appraisal of the methods used for the model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of TB screening programmes.

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 234 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 224 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 48 21%
Researcher 39 17%
Student > Postgraduate 20 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 9%
Student > Bachelor 19 8%
Other 49 21%
Unknown 39 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 119 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 3%
Social Sciences 5 2%
Other 22 9%
Unknown 50 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 April 2022.
All research outputs
#7,266,171
of 23,668,780 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,531
of 7,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,036
of 133,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#29
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,668,780 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,891 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 133,392 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 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 68% of its contemporaries.