↓ Skip to main content

Current National Health Insurance Coverage Policies for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Prophylactic Surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Oncology, April 2000
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Current National Health Insurance Coverage Policies for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Prophylactic Surgery
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology, April 2000
DOI 10.1007/s10434-000-0325-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Henry M. Kuerer, E. Shelley Hwang, James P. Anthony, R. Adams Dudley, Beth Crawford, Wade M. Aubry, Laura J. Esserman

Abstract

The efficacy of prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy in reducing breast and ovarian carcinoma has recently been reported in high-risk women. Because cost has become central to medical decision-making, this study was designed to evaluate currently existing coverage policies for these procedures. A confidential detailed cross-sectional nationwide survey of 481 medical directors from the American Association of Health Plans, Medicare, and Medicaid was conducted. Of the 150 respondents, 65% (n = 97) had 100,000 or more enrolled members and 35% (n = 53) had fewer than 100,000 enrolled members. Only 44% of private plans have specific policies for coverage of prophylactic mastectomy for a strong family history of breast cancer and 38% of plans for a BRCA mutation. Only 20% of total responding plans had a policy for coverage of prophylactic oophorectomy under any clinical circumstance. Governmental carriers were significantly less likely to have any policy for prophylactic surgery (range, 2%-12%) compared with nongovernmental plans (range, 24%-44%; P < .001). No significant regional differences for coverage policies were identified (P > .05). Significant variations currently exist for health insurance coverage of prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy. As genetic testing becomes widespread, more uniform policies should be established to enable appropriate high-risk candidates equal access and coverage for these procedures.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 27 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 18%
Other 4 14%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Professor 2 7%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 7 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 18%
Social Sciences 3 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 8 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 January 2006.
All research outputs
#7,495,032
of 22,912,409 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#2,637
of 6,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,940
of 39,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,912,409 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,495 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 39,761 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.