↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Setting priorities in the health care sector – the case of oral anticoagulants in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in Denmark

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Setting priorities in the health care sector – the case of oral anticoagulants in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in Denmark
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, October 2017
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s145813
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Bo Poulsen, Søren Paaske Johnsen, Morten Lock Hansen, Axel Brandes, Steen Husted, Louise Harboe, Lars Dybro

Abstract

Resources devoted to health care are limited, therefore setting priorities is required. It differs between countries whether decision-making concerning health care technologies focus on broad economic perspectives or whether focus is narrow on single budgets ("silo mentality"). The cost perspective as one part of the full health economic analysis is important for decision-making. With the case of oral anticoagulants in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), the aim is to discuss the implication of the use of different cost perspectives for decision-making and priority setting. In a cost analysis, the annual average total costs of five oral anticoagulants (warfarin and non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants [NOACs; dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban]) used in daily clinical practice in Denmark for the prevention of stroke in NVAF patients are analyzed. This is done in pairwise comparisons between warfarin and each NOAC based on five potential cost perspectives, from a "drug cost only" perspective up to a "societal" perspective. All comparisons of warfarin and NOACs show that the cost perspective based on all relevant costs, ie, total costs perspective, is essential for the choice of therapy. Focusing on the reimbursement costs of the drugs only, warfarin is the least costly option. However, with the aim of therapy to prevent strokes and limit bleedings, including the economic impact of this, all NOACs, except rivaroxaban, result in slightly lower health care costs compared with warfarin. The same picture was found applying the societal perspective. Many broad cost-effectiveness analyses of NOACs exist. However, in countries with budget focus in decision-making this information does not apply. The present study's case of oral anticoagulants has shown that decision-making should be based on health care or societal cost perspectives for optimal use of limited resources. Otherwise, the risk is that suboptimal decisions will be likely.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 19%
Other 3 14%
Professor 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 2 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 29%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 4 19%

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 11 October 2017.
All research outputs
#9,514,719
of 11,911,448 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#270
of 320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,830
of 273,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#11
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,911,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 320 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 273,828 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.