| Title |
Cost–utility analysis for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer therapy in South Korea: results of the polyethylene glycolated liposomal doxorubicin/carboplatin sequencing model
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ceor.s42170 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hwa-Young Lee, Bong-Min Yang, Ji-Min Hong, Tae-Jin Lee, Byoung-Gie Kim, Jae-Weon Kim, Young-Tae Kim, Yong-Man Kim, Sokbom Kang |
| Abstract |
We performed a cost-utility analysis to assess the cost-effectiveness of a chemotherapy sequence including a combination of polyethylene glycolated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD)/carboplatin versus paclitaxel/carboplatin as a second-line treatment in women with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 29% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 34% |
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 03 July 2013.
All research outputs
#20,723,696
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#445
of 525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,700
of 206,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#18
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 206,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.