↓ Skip to main content

The economic burden of cardiovascular disease and hypertension in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
332 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
723 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
The economic burden of cardiovascular disease and hypertension in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5806-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adrian Gheorghe, Ulla Griffiths, Adrianna Murphy, Helena Legido-Quigley, Peter Lamptey, Pablo Perel

Abstract

The evidence on the economic burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs) remains scarce. We conducted a comprehensive systematic review to establish the magnitude and knowledge gaps in relation to the economic burden of CVD and hypertension on households, health systems and the society. We included studies using primary or secondary data to produce original economic estimates of the impact of CVD. We searched sixteen electronic databases from 1990 onwards without language restrictions. We appraised the quality of included studies using a seven-question assessment tool. Eighty-three studies met the inclusion criteria, most of which were single centre retrospective cost studies conducted in secondary care settings. Studies in China, Brazil, India and Mexico contributed together 50% of the total number of economic estimates identified. The quality of the included studies was generally low. Reporting transparency, particularly for cost data sources and results, was poor. The costs per episode for hypertension and generic CVD were fairly homogeneous across studies; ranging between $500 and $1500. In contrast, for coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke cost estimates were generally higher and more heterogeneous, with several estimates in excess of $5000 per episode. The economic perspective and scope of the study appeared to impact cost estimates for hypertension and generic CVD considerably less than estimates for stroke and CHD. Most studies reported monthly costs for hypertension treatment around $22. Average monthly treatment costs for stroke and CHD ranged between $300 and $1000, however variability across estimates was high. In most LMICs both the annual cost of care and the cost of an acute episode exceed many times the total health expenditure per capita. The existing evidence on the economic burden of CVD in LMICs does not appear aligned with policy priorities in terms of research volume, pathologies studied and methodological quality. Not only is more economic research needed to fill the existing gaps, but research quality needs to be drastically improved. More broadly, national-level studies with appropriate sample sizes and adequate incorporation of indirect costs need to replace small-scale, institutional, retrospective cost studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 723 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 723 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 106 15%
Student > Bachelor 74 10%
Researcher 58 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 37 5%
Other 117 16%
Unknown 274 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 143 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 72 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 4%
Social Sciences 27 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 22 3%
Other 130 18%
Unknown 302 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 24 August 2021.
All research outputs
#3,636,735
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,961
of 15,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,354
of 330,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#103
of 296 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,063 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 330,726 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 296 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 65% of its contemporaries.