| Title |
Utilities associated with subcutaneous injections and intravenous infusions for treatment of patients with bone metastases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s44947 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Louis S Matza, Ze Cong, Karen Chung, Alison Stopeck, Katia Tonkin, Janet Brown, Ada Braun, Kate Van Brunt, Kelly McDaniel |
| Abstract |
Although cost-utility models are often used to estimate the value of treatments for metastatic cancer, limited information is available on the utility of common treatment modalities. Bisphosphonate treatment for bone metastases is frequently administered via intravenous infusion, while a newer treatment is administered as a subcutaneous injection. This study estimated the impact of these treatment modalities on health state preference. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 22% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 6 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 03 October 2022.
All research outputs
#5,227,267
of 25,540,105 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#367
of 1,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,960
of 210,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#9
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,540,105 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 210,436 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.