↓ Skip to main content

Is the choice of the statistical model relevant in the cost estimation of patients with chronic diseases? An empirical approach by the Piedmont Diabetes Registry

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
Is the choice of the statistical model relevant in the cost estimation of patients with chronic diseases? An empirical approach by the Piedmont Diabetes Registry
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-1241-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eva Pagano, Alessio Petrelli, Roberta Picariello, Franco Merletti, Roberto Gnavi, Graziella Bruno

Abstract

Chronic diseases impose large economic burdens. Cost analysis is not straightforward, particularly when the goal is to relate costs to specific patterns of covariates, and to compare costs between diseased and healthy populations. Using different statistical methods this study describes the impact on results and conclusions of analyzing health care costs in a population with diabetes. Direct health care costs of people living in Turin were estimated from administrative databases of the Regional Health System. Patients with diabetes were identified through the Piedmont Diabetes Registry. The effect of diabetes on mean annual expenditure was analyzed using the following multivariable models: 1) an ordinary least squares regression (OLS); 2) a lognormal linear regression model; 3) a generalized linear model (GLM) with gamma distribution. Presence of zero cost observation was handled by means of a two part model. The OLS provides the effect of covariates in terms of absolute additive costs due to the presence of diabetes (€ 1,832). Lognormal and GLM provide relative estimates of the effect: the cost for diabetes would be six fold that for non diabetes patients calculated with the lognormal. The same data give a 2.6-fold increase if calculated with the GLM. Different methods provide quite different estimated costs for patients with and without diabetes, and different costs ratios between them, ranging from 3.2 to 5.6. Costs estimates of a chronic disease vary considerably depending on the statistical method employed; therefore a careful choice of methods to analyze data is required before inferring results.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 17%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Other 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 14 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 27%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 14 20%
Unknown 19 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 December 2015.
All research outputs
#16,099,609
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,823
of 7,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,533
of 398,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#73
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 398,396 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.