↓ Skip to main content

An economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial evaluating an individually tailored lifestyle intervention compared with usual care in people with Familial Hypercholesterolemia

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
An economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial evaluating an individually tailored lifestyle intervention compared with usual care in people with Familial Hypercholesterolemia
Published in
BMC Research Notes, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-1282-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen Broekhuizen, Marieke F van Wier, Lando L J Koppes, Johannes Brug, Willem van Mechelen, Judith E Bosmans, Mireille N M van Poppel

Abstract

Cost-effectiveness analyses provide insight in the use of lifestyle interventions. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a lifestyle intervention compared to usual care in people with Familial Hypercholesterolemia, 340 people with FH were randomized to the intervention or control group. LDL cholesterol, quality of life and costs were measured at 0 and 12 months. Cost-effectiveness analyses were performed from a healthcare perspective using bootstrapping techniques. Non-significant decreases in LDL cholesterol and quality of life were found. The mean between-group difference in costs was €-237 (95% CI -1,386 to 130). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 1,729 per 1 mmol/l LDL cholesterol and 145,899 per QALY gained. Assumed that the small non-significant decrease in LDL cholesterol is attributed to the intervention, the probability of cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to usual care was 91% per 1 mmol/l LDL cholesterol reduction and 75% per QALY gained at a ceiling ratio of €20,000. The intervention is not cost-effective. NTR1899, date 07-07-2009.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 68 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 23%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Professor 5 7%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 16 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 6%
Psychology 4 6%
Other 15 22%
Unknown 20 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 October 2018.
All research outputs
#5,888,070
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#877
of 4,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,159
of 263,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#16
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 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 4,262 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 well, scoring higher than 79% 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 263,426 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.