↓ Skip to main content

Economic Evaluations of Opioid Use Disorder Interventions

Overview of attention for article published in PharmacoEconomics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
Title
Economic Evaluations of Opioid Use Disorder Interventions
Published in
PharmacoEconomics, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40273-016-0400-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sean M. Murphy, Daniel Polsky

Abstract

The economic costs associated with opioid misuse are immense. Effective interventions for opioid use disorders are available; however, given the scarce resources faced by substance use treatment providers and payers of all kinds, evidence of effectiveness is not always sufficient to encourage adoption of a given therapy-nor should it be. Economic evaluations can provide evidence that will help stakeholders efficiently allocate their resources. The purpose of this study was to review the literature on economic evaluations of opioid use disorder interventions. We performed a systematic review of the major electronic databases from inception until August 2015. A sensitive approach was used to ensure a comprehensive list of relevant articles. Given the quality of the existing reviews, we narrowed our search to studies published since 2007. The Drummond checklist was used to evaluate and categorize economic evaluation studies according to their quality. A total of 98 articles were identified as potentially relevant to the current study. Of these 98 articles, half (n = 49) were included in this study. Six of the included articles were reviews. The remaining 43 articles reported economic evaluation studies of interventions for opioid use disorders. In general, the evidence on methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) supports previous findings that MMT is an economically advantageous opioid use disorder therapy. The economic literature comparing MMT with other opioid use disorder pharmacotherapies is limited, as is the literature on other forms of therapy. With the possible exception of MMT, additional high-quality economic evaluations are needed in order to assess the relative value of existing opioid use disorder interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users 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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 122 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 17%
Researcher 17 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 30 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 19%
Social Sciences 18 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 12%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 14 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 30 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 02 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,484,057
of 24,189,858 outputs
Outputs from PharmacoEconomics
#76
of 1,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,479
of 304,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PharmacoEconomics
#1
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,189,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,946 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 304,722 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 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 99% of its contemporaries.