↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Medical technology as a key driver of rising health expenditure: disentangling the relationship

Overview of attention for article published in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#20 of 441)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
policy
5 policy sources
twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
96 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
283 Mendeley
Title
Medical technology as a key driver of rising health expenditure: disentangling the relationship
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, May 2013
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s39634
Pubmed ID
Authors

Corinna Sorenson, Drummond, Bhuiyan-Khan

Abstract

Health care spending has risen steadily in most countries, becoming a concern for decision-makers worldwide. Commentators often point to new medical technology as the key driver for burgeoning expenditures. This paper critically appraises this conjecture, based on an analysis of the existing literature, with the aim of offering a more detailed and considered analysis of this relationship. Several databases were searched to identify relevant literature. Various categories of studies (eg, multivariate and cost-effectiveness analyses) were included to cover different perspectives, methodological approaches, and issues regarding the link between medical technology and costs. Selected articles were reviewed and relevant information was extracted into a standardized template and analyzed for key cross-cutting themes, ie, impact of technology on costs, factors influencing this relationship, and methodological challenges in measuring such linkages. A total of 86 studies were reviewed. The analysis suggests that the relationship between medical technology and spending is complex and often conflicting. Findings were frequently contingent on varying factors, such as the availability of other interventions, patient population, and the methodological approach employed. Moreover, the impact of technology on costs differed across technologies, in that some (eg, cancer drugs, invasive medical devices) had significant financial implications, while others were cost-neutral or cost-saving. In light of these issues, we argue that decision-makers and other commentators should extend their focus beyond costs solely to include consideration of whether medical technology results in better value in health care and broader socioeconomic benefits.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 283 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 277 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 56 20%
Student > Bachelor 45 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 13%
Researcher 29 10%
Other 18 6%
Other 44 16%
Unknown 55 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 78 28%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 33 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 32 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 18 6%
Social Sciences 13 5%
Other 39 14%
Unknown 70 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 23 September 2021.
All research outputs
#753,916
of 19,195,752 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#20
of 441 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,678
of 169,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#2
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,195,752 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 441 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 169,196 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.