↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Adherence to disease-modifying therapies and its impact on relapse, health resource utilization, and costs among patients with multiple sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
105 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
Title
Adherence to disease-modifying therapies and its impact on relapse, health resource utilization, and costs among patients with multiple sclerosis
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, April 2017
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s130334
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jack Burks, Thomas S Marshall, Xiaolan Ye

Abstract

To evaluate adherence to disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) among patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) initiating oral and injectable DMTs, and to estimate the impact of adherence on relapse, health resource utilization, and medical costs. Commercially insured MS patients (aged 18-65 years, two or more MS diagnoses, one or more DMT claims) with continuous eligibility 12 months before and after the first DMT claim date (index date) and no DMT claim during the pre-index period were identified from a large commerical claims database for the period from January 1, 2008, to September 30, 2015. Adherence to the index DMT was measured by the 12-month post-index proportion of days covered (PDC) and compared between oral and injectable DMT initiators. After adjustment for sex, age at index DMT, and comorbidities, regression models examined the relationship between adherence and relapse risk, MS-related health resource utilization, and non-drug medical costs (2015 US$). The study covered 12,431 patients and nine DMTs. Adherence to the index DMT did not differ significantly between oral (n=1,018) and injectable (n=11,413) DMTs when assessed by mean PDC (0.7257±0.2934 vs 0.7259±0.2869, respectively; P=0.0787), or percentages achieving PDC ≥0.8 (61.4% vs 58.6%, respectively; P=0.0806). Compared to non-adherence, adherence to DMT significantly reduced the likelihood of relapse in the post-index 12 months by 42%, hospitalization by 52%, and emergency visits by 38% (all, P<0.0001). Adherent patients would be expected to have on average 0.7 fewer outpatient visits annually versus non-adherent patients (P<0.0001). Based on the differences in predicted mean costs, adherence (vs non-adherence) would decrease the total annual medical care costs by $5,816 per patient, including hospitalization costs by $1,953, emergency visits by $171, and outpatient visits by $2,802. Adherence remains suboptimal but comparable between oral and injectable DMTs. Potential health and economic benefits underscore the importance of improving adherence in MS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 13 16%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Researcher 6 8%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 21 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 14%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 25 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 15 January 2020.
All research outputs
#4,259,644
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#93
of 530 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,559
of 326,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 530 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 326,846 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.