↓ Skip to main content

Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Opportunities and Challenges

Overview of attention for article published in Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, August 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 (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
Title
Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Opportunities and Challenges
Published in
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40258-017-0343-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ramesh Lamsal, Jennifer D. Zwicker

Abstract

Economic evaluation is a tool used to inform decision makers on the efficiency of comparative healthcare interventions and inform resource allocation decisions. There is a growing need for the use of economic evaluations to assess the value of interventions for children with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), a population that has increasing demands for healthcare services. Unfortunately, few evaluations have been conducted to date, perhaps stemming from challenges in applying existing economic evaluation methodologies in this heterogeneous population. Opportunities exist to innovate methods to address key challenges in conducting economic evaluations of interventions for children with NDDs. In this paper, we discuss important considerations and highlight areas for future work. This includes the paucity of appropriate instruments for measuring outcomes meaningful to children with NDDs and their families, difficulties in the measurement of costs due to service utilization in a wide variety of sectors, complexities in the measurement of caregiver and family effects and considerations in estimating long-term productivity costs. Innovation and application of evaluation approaches in these areas will help inform decisions around whether the resources currently spent on interventions for children with NDDs represent good value for money, or whether greater benefits for children could be generated by spending money in other ways.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 111 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Lecturer 7 6%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 43 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 5%
Psychology 5 5%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 50 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 17 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,427,218
of 23,543,207 outputs
Outputs from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#96
of 799 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,392
of 319,863 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#4
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,543,207 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 799 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 319,863 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 71% of its contemporaries.