| Title |
The cost-effectiveness of screening for gestational diabetes mellitus in primary and secondary care in the Republic of Ireland
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diabetologia, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00125-015-3824-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andriy Danyliv, Paddy Gillespie, Ciaran O’Neill, Marie Tierney, Angela O’Dea, Brian E. McGuire, Liam G. Glynn, Fidelma P. Dunne |
| Abstract |
The aim of the study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of screening for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in primary and secondary care settings, compared with a no-screening option, in the Republic of Ireland. The analysis was based on a decision-tree model of alternative screening strategies in primary and secondary care settings. It synthesised data generated from a randomised controlled trial (screening uptake) and from the literature. Costs included those relating to GDM screening and treatment, and the care of adverse outcomes. Effects were assessed in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The impact of the parameter uncertainty was assessed in a range of sensitivity analyses. Screening in either setting was found to be superior to no screening, i.e. it provided for QALY gains and cost savings. Screening in secondary care was found to be superior to screening in primary care, providing for modest QALY gains of 0.0006 and a saving of €21.43 per screened case. The conclusion held with high certainty across the range of ceiling ratios from zero to €100,000 per QALY and across a plausible range of input parameters. The results of this study demonstrate that implementation of universal screening is cost-effective. This is an argument in favour of introducing a properly designed and funded national programme of screening for GDM, although affordability remains to be assessed. In the current environment, screening for GDM in secondary care settings appears to be the better solution in consideration of cost-effectiveness. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 4 | 57% |
| Ireland | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 29% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 15 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 13% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 19 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 19 August 2021.
All research outputs
#4,624,477
of 23,576,969 outputs
Outputs from Diabetologia
#1,957
of 5,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,049
of 393,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetologia
#23
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,576,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,134 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 393,065 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 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.