| Title |
Cost and clinical consequences of smoking cessation in outpatients after cardiovascular disease: a retrospective cohort study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ceor.s43256 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antoni Sicras-Mainar, Silvia Díaz-Cerezo, Verónica Sanz de Burgoa, Ruth Navarro-Artieda |
| Abstract |
This cohort retrospective study explored the cost and clinical consequences of smoking cessation in outpatients after cardiovascular events (CVEs), in Spain. A total of 2,540 patients (68.1 years; 60.7% male; 8.4% smokers, 52.9% ex-smokers, and 38.7% never smokers) fulfilling the selection criteria and followed up throughout a period of 36 months after the event were considered eligible for analysis. Total costs were higher among current smokers in comparison with ex-smokers and never smokers (€7,981 versus [vs] €7,322 and €5,619, respectively) (P < 0.001). Both health care costs (€6,273 vs €5,673 and €4,823, respectively) (P < 001) and loss of productivity at work costs (€1,708 vs €1,650 and €796, respectively) (P < 001) accounted for such differences. There was also a difference in CVE recurrence rates (18.6% vs 16.5% and 9.6%, respectively) (P < 01). Smoking cessation in CVE outpatients was associated with lower cost and risk of CVE recurrence compared with smokers, and their health status was similar to that of never smokers, in routine clinical practice in Spain. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 20% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 10% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 10% |
| Psychology | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 November 2013.
All research outputs
#14,593,798
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#259
of 525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,850
of 210,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#8
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 210,285 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.