| Title |
Modeled cost-effectiveness of the experience corps baltimore based on a pilot randomized trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Urban Health, March 2004
|
| DOI | 10.1093/jurban/jth097 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kevin D. Frick, Michelle C. Carlson, Thomas A. Glass, Sylvia McGill, George W. Rebok, Crystal Simpson, Linda P. Fried |
| Abstract |
The Experience Corps program was designed to harness the social capital of an aging society to improve outcomes for public elementary schools. The objectives of this article are (1) to model the cost-effectiveness of the Experience Corps Baltimore using data from a pilot randomized trial, including costs, older adults' health status, and quality of life and cost data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, and (2) to describe the relationship between children experiencing increased expected lifetime earnings through improved educational attainment resulting from exposure to the Experience Corps Baltimore volunteers and the program's costs and cost-effectiveness. On average, each quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained by older adults in Experience Corps Baltimore costs $205,000. The lower bound of the 95% confidence interval for the cost-effectiveness is $65,000/QALY. The upper bound is undefined as 15% of the simulations indicated no QALY improvements. If 0.3% of students exposed to the Experience Corps Baltimore changed from not graduating to graduating, the increased lifetime earnings would make the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $49,000/QALY. If an additional 0.1% changed to graduating from high school, the program would be cost-saving. Using conservative modeling assumptions and excluding benefits to teachers, principals, and the surrounding community, the Experience Corps Baltimore appears expensive for the older adults' health improvements, but requires only small long-term benefits to the target children to make the program cost-effective or cost-saving. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Peru | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 76 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 19% |
| Researcher | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 19 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 17 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 8% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 23 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 23 May 2016.
All research outputs
#1,891,912
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#291
of 1,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,474
of 63,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,718 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 63,045 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.