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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Untangling the cost–effectiveness knot: who is oral antiretroviral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis really for?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1586/14737167.2014.887447 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Catherine A Hankins |
| Abstract |
Clinical trials of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) antiretroviral drugs have shown excellent protection against HIV acquisition when plasma drug levels are detectable, indicating good adherence. Cost-effectiveness depends on epidemic context, adherence, drug cost, and other factors. For individuals at highest risk of HIV who are unable to use proven HIV prevention methods such as condoms and sterile injecting equipment, PrEP may be a workable option over short- to medium-term risky periods of their lives. Adding PrEP to HIV prevention programmes will be most effective as part of a combination prevention strategy that addresses both immediate risks and underlying vulnerabilities, and the pathways that link them. Determining who is most motivated to adhere to PrEP and supporting them through participant-centred approaches that assist people to find their own adherence solutions will be critical to determining the real-life cost-effectiveness of PrEP for HIV prevention and for whom HIV PrEP is most suited. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 39 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 32% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 7 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 37% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 March 2014.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
#509
of 765 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,686
of 238,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
#167
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 765 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 238,952 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.