↓ Skip to main content

How Should We Intervene on the Financial Toxicity of Cancer Care? One Shot, Four Perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in ASCO Educational Book, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How Should We Intervene on the Financial Toxicity of Cancer Care? One Shot, Four Perspectives
Published in
ASCO Educational Book, January 2017
DOI 10.14694/edbk_174893
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. Yousuf Zafar, Lee N. Newcomer, Justin McCarthy, Shelley Fuld Nasso, Leonard B. Saltz

Abstract

The median price of a month of chemotherapy has increased by an order of magnitude during the past 20 years, far exceeding inflation over the same period. Along with rising prices, increases in cost sharing have forced patients to directly shoulder a greater portion of those costs, resulting in undue financial burden and, in some cases, cost-related nonadherence to treatment. What can we do to intervene on treatment-related financial toxicity of patients? No one party can single-handedly solve the problem, and the solution must be multifaceted and creative. A productive discussion of the problem must avoid casting blame and, instead, must look inward for concrete starting points toward improvement in the affordability and value of cancer care. With these points in mind, the authors-representatives from the pharmaceutical industry, insurance providers, oncologists, and patient advocacy-have each been asked to respond with a practical answer to the provocative hypothetical question, "If you could propose one thing, and one thing only, in terms of an action or change by the constituency you represent in this discussion, what would that be?"

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 29%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Other 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 13%
Social Sciences 2 8%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 7 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 03 June 2017.
All research outputs
#14,918,049
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from ASCO Educational Book
#576
of 849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,159
of 421,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ASCO Educational Book
#19
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 421,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.