| Title |
EMA and NICE Appraisal Processes for Cancer Drugs: Current Status and Uncertainties
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40258-018-0393-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rumona Dickson, Angela Boland, Rui Duarte, Eleanor Kotas, Nerys Woolacott, Robert Hodgson, Rob Riemsma, Sabine Grimm, Bram Ramaekers, Manuela Joore, Nasuh Büyükkaramikli, Eva Kaltenthaler, Matt Stevenson, Abdullah Pandor, Steve Edwards, Martin Hoyle, Jonathan Shepherd, Xavier Armoiry, Miriam Brazzelli |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 | 7 | 47% |
| Myanmar | 1 | 7% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| Canada | 1 | 7% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 20% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 13% |
| Psychology | 2 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 7% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 June 2021.
All research outputs
#3,101,153
of 23,079,238 outputs
Outputs from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#136
of 786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,879
of 330,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,079,238 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 786 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 330,889 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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 93% of its contemporaries.