| Title |
Health economic evaluations of non-pharmacological interventions for persons with dementia and their informal caregivers: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12877-018-0751-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Franziska Nickel, Janina Barth, Peter L. Kolominsky-Rabas |
| Abstract |
This systematic review aims to review the literature on trial-based economic evaluations of non-pharmacological interventions directly targeted at persons with dementia as well as persons with mild cognitive impairment and their respective caregivers. A systematic literature research was conducted for the timeframe from 2010 to 2016 in the following databases: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, EconLit, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO and PubMed. Study quality was assessed according to the Drummond criteria. In total sixteen publications were identified. Health economic evaluations indicated the cost-effectiveness of physical exercise interventions and occupational therapy. There was also evidence to suggest that psychological and behavioral therapies are cost-effective. Health economic studies investigating psychosocial interventions mainly targeted towards informal caregivers showed inconsistent results. Due to the increasing prevalence of dementia non-pharmacological interventions and their health economic impact are of increasing importance for health care decision-makers and HTA agencies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 54 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 10 | 19% |
| Ireland | 10 | 19% |
| Spain | 6 | 11% |
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Australia | 2 | 4% |
| Canada | 2 | 4% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Greece | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 33 | 61% |
| Scientists | 11 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 152 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 12% |
| Researcher | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 14% |
| Unknown | 56 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 18% |
| Psychology | 16 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 22 | 14% |
| Unknown | 61 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 50. 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 October 2022.
All research outputs
#806,806
of 24,733,536 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#101
of 3,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,599
of 337,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#7
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,733,536 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,468 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 337,630 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.