| Title |
Cost-effectiveness of rule-based immunoprophylaxis against respiratory syncytial virus infections in preterm infants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Pediatrics, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00431-017-3046-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maarten O. Blanken, Geert W. Frederix, Elisabeth E. Nibbelke, Hendrik Koffijberg, Elisabeth A. M. Sanders, Maroeska M. Rovers, Louis Bont, on behalf of the Dutch RSV Neonatal Network |
| Abstract |
The objective of the paper is to assess the cost-effectiveness of targeted respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) prophylaxis based on a validated prediction rule with 1-year time horizon in moderately preterm infants compared to no prophylaxis. Data on health care consumption were derived from a randomised clinical trial on wheeze reduction following RSV prophylaxis and a large birth cohort study on risk prediction of RSV hospitalisation. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of targeted RSV prophylaxis vs. no prophylaxis per quality-adjusted life year (QALYs) using a societal perspective, including medical and parental costs and effects. Costs and health outcomes were modelled in a decision tree analysis with sensitivity analyses. Targeted RSV prophylaxis in infants with a first-year RSV hospitalisation risk of > 10% resulted in a QALY gain of 0.02 (0.931 vs. 0.929) per patient against additional cost of €472 compared to no prophylaxis (ICER €214,748/QALY). The ICER falls below a threshold of €80,000 per QALY when RSV prophylaxis cost would be lowered from €928 (baseline) to €406 per unit. At a unit cost of €97, RSV prophylaxis would be cost saving. Targeted RSV prophylaxis is not cost-effective in reducing RSV burden of disease in moderately preterm infants, but it can become cost-effective if lower priced biosimilar palivizumab or a vaccine would be available. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 17% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 17% |
| Spain | 1 | 17% |
| Colombia | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 118 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 16% |
| Researcher | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 11% |
| Unknown | 41 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 6 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 46 | 39% |
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 22 November 2019.
All research outputs
#13,338,481
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Pediatrics
#2,311
of 3,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,286
of 437,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Pediatrics
#37
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 437,841 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.