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 |
Uma comparação dos custos do transplante renal em relação às diálises no Brasil
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cadernos de Saúde Pública, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1590/0102-311x00013515 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Silvia Brand Silva, Heitor Mansur Caulliraux, Claudia Affonso Silva Araújo, Eduardo Rocha |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to compare the direct medical costs of renal transplantation and renal replacement therapies, specifically hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, from the perspective of the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS). Renal replacement therapies costs were based on data published in the literature. Cost items for kidney transplant were identified in a private hospital based on procedure codes used for charging the SUS, and other items were taken from the literature. In the four years covered by the study, cadaver kidney transplant generated per-patient savings of BRL 37,000 and BRL 74,000 compared to hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, respectively. Savings were even greater with living donor kidney transplant: BRL 46,000 and BRL 82,000 compared to hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, respectively. This result, together with survival and quality-of-life analyses, characterizes kidney transplant as the best clinical and financial alternative, thus supporting public policies for organ transplants in Brazil. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 87 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 33 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 15% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 32 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 August 2019.
All research outputs
#15,397,966
of 25,718,113 outputs
Outputs from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#800
of 1,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,880
of 401,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,718,113 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,879 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 401,646 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 50% of its contemporaries.