↓ Skip to main content

Cost of clinical events in health economic evaluations in Germany: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Cost of clinical events in health economic evaluations in Germany: a systematic review
Published in
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, May 2012
DOI 10.1186/1478-7547-10-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monika Scheuringer, Narine Sahakyan, Karl J Krobot, Volker Ulrich

Abstract

Guidance from the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) on cost estimation in cost-benefit assessments in Germany acknowledges the need for standardization of costing methodology. The objective of this review was to assess current methods for deriving clinical event costs in German economic evaluations. A systematic literature search of 24 databases (including MEDLINE, BIOSIS, the Cochrane Library and Embase) identified articles, published between January 2005 and October 2009, which reported cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analyses. Studies assessed German patients and evaluated at least one of 11 predefined clinical events relevant to patients with diabetes mellitus. A total of 21 articles, describing 199 clinical cost events, met the inclusion criteria. Year of costing and time horizon were available for 194 (97%) and 163 (82%) cost events, respectively. Cost components were rarely specified (32 [16%]). Costs were generally based on a single literature source (140 [70%]); where multiple sources were cited (32 [16%]), data synthesis methodology was not reported. Cost ranges for common events, assessed using a Markov model with a cycle length of 12 months, were: acute myocardial infarction (nine studies), first year, 4,618-17,556 €; follow-up years, 1,006-3,647 €; and stroke (10 studies), first year; 10,149-24,936 €; follow-up years, 676-7,337 €. These results demonstrate that costs for individual clinical events vary substantially in German health economic evaluations, and that there is a lack of transparency and consistency in the methods used to derive them. The validity and comparability of economic evaluations would be improved by guidance on standardizing costing methodology for individual clinical events.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Turkey 1 2%
Unknown 61 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 19%
Researcher 11 17%
Student > Master 9 14%
Other 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 13 21%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 14 22%
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 26 November 2012.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#396
of 533 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,124
of 179,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 533 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 179,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them