↓ Skip to main content

The cost-effectiveness of population Health Checks: have the NHS Health Checks been unfairly maligned?

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
22 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The cost-effectiveness of population Health Checks: have the NHS Health Checks been unfairly maligned?
Published in
The Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10389-017-0801-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastian Hinde, Laura Bojke, Gerry Richardson, Lise Retat, Laura Webber

Abstract

The English NHS currently has a policy of providing Health Checks to all 40-74 year olds. Administered in primary care, they aim to identify patients at risk of a range of diseases, including diabetes and heart disease, and facilitate care. This study is the first to use observed data on the effectiveness of the Checks to consider whether they represent a cost-effective use of limited NHS resources. Using a publicly available evaluation tool we conducted an analysis of the Checks to establish the long-term cost and health-related outcomes of a cohort of patients. The primary focus of the analysis was to establish whether the impact of the Checks on BMI was sufficient to justify their cost. The Checks were associated with a reduction in mean BMI of 0.27 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.34) compared to no Check. When applied to the evaluative tool, a small but positive QALY gain of 0.05 per participant was observed, coupled with a reduction in disease-related care costs of £170 ($210 USD). When the estimated cost per Check (£179, $220 USD) is taken into account, we estimate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £900/QALY ($1109 USD/QALY). Much of the criticism of the Health Checks has focussed on the relatively small average change in risk factors such as BMI. However, this analysis suggests that the significant health and cost-saving benefits from even a modest reduction in mean BMI, coupled with the low costs of the Checks, combine to result in a potentially highly cost-effective policy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 24%
Student > Bachelor 7 17%
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 6 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 12%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 14 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 29 June 2022.
All research outputs
#2,241,228
of 25,394,081 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,937
of 323,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,081 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.0. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 323,304 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them