↓ Skip to main content

Management of multiple sclerosis patients in central European countries: current needs and potential solutions

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Management of multiple sclerosis patients in central European countries: current needs and potential solutions
Published in
Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders, February 2018
DOI 10.1177/1756286418759189
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Berger, Monika Adamczyk-Sowa, Tünde Csépány, Franz Fazekas, Tanja Hojs Fabjan, Dana Horáková, Zsolt Illes, Eleonóra Klimová, Fritz Leutmezer, Konrad Rejdak, Csilla Rozsa, Saša Šega Jazbec, Jarmila Szilasiová, Peter Turčáni, Marta Vachová, László Vécsei, Eva Havrdová

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) experts in Europe are facing rapidly rising demands of excellence due to the increasing complexity of MS therapy and management. A central European expert board of MS experts met to identify needs and obstacles with respect to raising quality of MS care in central and Eastern European countries. There are substantial variations across countries regarding delivery of care and its cost structure, as well as access to treatment. To date, Eastern European countries are often less able to afford reimbursement of immunomodulatory agents than Western countries. Overall, approximately 40% of working-age patients are not working due to MS. Costs rise steeply with increasing disability; indirect costs constitute the bulk of the financial burden in patients with severe MS. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment is meanwhile obligatory as the diagnostic interface in the management of MS patients. Recommended measures directed at improving quality of care include the collection of patient data in registries, enhanced education of healthcare professionals, implementation of national strategies aiming at reducing regional variation, optimization of approval processes, and removal of administrative barriers. Local partnerships with authorities such as those that represent the interests of employees can contribute to leverage the importance of epidemiological data. The need for education extends to (neuro)radiologists who are responsible for reporting MRI findings in expert quality. Dissemination of the Magnetic Resonance Imaging in MS (MAGNIMS) protocol would be an important step in this context. Also, clinical freedom of choice is rated as essential. Physicians should have access to a range of treatment options due to the complexity of disease. Guidelines such as the upcoming EAN-ECTRIMS clinical practice guideline also aim at providing a basis for argumentation in negotiations with national health authorities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 12 25%
Unknown 14 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 19%
Neuroscience 5 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Computer Science 3 6%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 15 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 15 January 2020.
All research outputs
#7,963,683
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders
#291
of 648 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,728
of 344,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders
#10
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 648 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 344,220 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.