↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Economic evaluation of screening programs for hepatitis C virus infection: evidence from literature

Overview of attention for article published in Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Economic evaluation of screening programs for hepatitis C virus infection: evidence from literature
Published in
Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, April 2015
DOI 10.2147/rmhp.s56911
Pubmed ID
Authors

Silvia Coretti, Federica Romano, Valentina Orlando, Paola Codella, Sabrina Prete, Eugenio Di Brino, Matteo Ruggeri

Abstract

Hepatitis C is a liver infection caused by hepatitis C virus. Its main complications are cirrhosis and liver cancer. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), more than 185 million people worldwide are infected with hepatitis C virus and, of these, 350,000 die every year. Due to the high disease prevalence and the existence of effective (and expensive) medical treatments able to dramatically change the prognosis, early detection programs can potentially prevent the development of serious chronic conditions, improve health, and save resources. To summarize the available evidence on the cost-effectiveness of screening programs for hepatitis C. A literature search was performed on PubMed and Scopus search engines. Trip database was queried to identify reports produced by the major Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies. Three reviewers dealt with study selection and data extraction blindly. Ten papers eventually met the inclusion criteria. In studies focusing on asymptomatic cohorts of individuals at general risk the cost/quality adjusted life year of screening programs ranged between US $4,200 and $50,000/quality adjusted life year gained, while in those focusing on specific risk factors the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ranged between $848 and $128,424/quality adjusted life year gained. Age of the target population and disease prevalence were the main cost-effectiveness drivers. Our results suggest that, especially in the long run, screening programs represent a cost-effective strategy for the management of hepatitis C.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 38 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 15 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 24%
Psychology 3 7%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 17 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 September 2015.
All research outputs
#7,409,480
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Risk Management and Healthcare Policy
#212
of 742 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,465
of 283,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Risk Management and Healthcare Policy
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 742 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 283,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.