↓ Skip to main content

Economic evaluation of health promotion interventions for older people: do applied economic studies meet the methodological challenges?

Overview of attention for article published in Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Economic evaluation of health promotion interventions for older people: do applied economic studies meet the methodological challenges?
Published in
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12962-018-0100-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kai Huter, Katarzyna Dubas-Jakóbczyk, Ewa Kocot, Katarzyna Kissimova-Skarbek, Heinz Rothgang

Abstract

In the light of demographic developments health promotion interventions for older people are gaining importance. In addition to methodological challenges arising from the economic evaluation of health promotion interventions in general, there are specific methodological problems for the particular target group of older people. There are especially four main methodological challenges that are discussed in the literature. They concern measurement and valuation of informal caregiving, accounting for productivity costs, effects of unrelated cost in added life years and the inclusion of 'beyond-health' benefits. This paper focuses on the question whether and to what extent specific methodological requirements are actually met in applied health economic evaluations. Following a systematic review of pertinent health economic evaluations, the included studies are analysed on the basis of four assessment criteria that are derived from methodological debates on the economic evaluation of health promotion interventions in general and economic evaluations targeting older people in particular. Of the 37 studies included in the systematic review, only very few include cost and outcome categories discussed as being of specific relevance to the assessment of health promotion interventions for older people. The few studies that consider these aspects use very heterogeneous methods, thus there is no common methodological standard. There is a strong need for the development of guidelines to achieve better comparability and to include cost categories and outcomes that are relevant for older people. Disregarding these methodological obstacles could implicitly lead to discrimination against the elderly in terms of health promotion and disease prevention and, hence, an age-based rationing of public health care.

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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 17 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 9 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 17%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 11%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 18 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#4,125,829
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#132
of 431 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,447
of 296,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 431 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 296,868 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.