↓ Skip to main content

EQ-5D in Central and Eastern Europe: 2000–2015

Overview of attention for article published in Quality of Life Research, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
103 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
Title
EQ-5D in Central and Eastern Europe: 2000–2015
Published in
Quality of Life Research, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11136-016-1375-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fanni Rencz, László Gulácsi, Michael Drummond, Dominik Golicki, Valentina Prevolnik Rupel, Judit Simon, Elly A. Stolk, Valentin Brodszky, Petra Baji, Jakub Závada, Guenka Petrova, Alexandru Rotar, Márta Péntek

Abstract

Cost per quality-adjusted life year data are required for reimbursement decisions in many Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. EQ-5D is by far the most commonly used instrument to generate utility values in CEE. This study aims to systematically review the literature on EQ-5D from eight CEE countries. An electronic database search was performed up to 1 July 2015 to identify original EQ-5D studies from the countries of interest. We analysed the use of EQ-5D with respect to clinical areas, methodological rigor, population norms and value sets. We identified 143 studies providing 152 country-specific results with a total sample size of 81,619: Austria (n = 11), Bulgaria (n = 6), Czech Republic (n = 18), Hungary (n = 47), Poland (n = 51), Romania (n = 2), Slovakia (n = 3) and Slovenia (n = 14). Cardiovascular (21 %), neurologic (17 %), musculoskeletal (15 %) and endocrine, nutritional and metabolic diseases (13 %) were the most frequently studied clinical areas. Overall, 112 (78 %) of the studies reported EQ VAS results and 86 (60 %) EQ-5D index scores, of which 27 (31 %) did not specify the applied tariff. Hungary, Poland and Slovenia have population norms. Poland and Slovenia also have a national value set. Increasing use of EQ-5D is observed throughout CEE. The spread of health technology assessment activities in countries seems to be reflected in the number of EQ-5D studies. However, improvement in informed use and methodological quality of reporting is needed. In jurisdictions where no national value set is available, in order to ensure comparability we recommend to apply the most frequently used UK tariff. Regional collaboration between CEE countries should be strengthened.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 105 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Researcher 11 10%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 25 24%
Unknown 27 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 8%
Social Sciences 8 8%
Psychology 4 4%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 29 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 31 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,336,685
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#2,587
of 2,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#320,159
of 365,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#70
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,851 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 365,421 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 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.