| Title |
A medicoeconomic review of early intervention with biologic agents in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ceor.s39212 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shmuel Odes, Dan Greenberg |
| Abstract |
The treatment of inflammatory bowel disease with standard therapy fails to control the disease in many patients. Biologic therapy has an increasing role in altering the natural history of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, and is improving patient prognosis. However, indications for treatment and issues with drug costs and value for money remain unclear. Also, when to perform early intervention with biologic agents is at present unclear. We performed an extensive literature search and review to address these issues. The biologics provide better care for many patients. The choice of biologic agent, the indications for its use, the switch between agents, and the considerations of cost are outlined, with a view to guiding the treating physician in managing these cases. Outstanding issues and anticipated future developments are defined. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 26% |
| Unknown | 7 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 43% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
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 23 October 2014.
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
#194,720
of 265,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#9
of 11 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 265,716 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.