↓ Skip to main content

Increasing healthcare costs

Overview of attention for article published in Current opinion in ophthalmology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Increasing healthcare costs
Published in
Current opinion in ophthalmology, March 2017
DOI 10.1097/icu.0000000000000343
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Despite a decrease in real average growth rates per capita since 2009, healthcare costs continue to rise worldwide. Numerous patient-related and doctor-related factors have contributed to this rise. Glaucoma is the leading cause of irreversible blindness and requires chronic, usually lifelong treatment. As with other chronic diseases, the adherence to prescribed treatment is often low and maybe influenced by the cost of the therapy. The purpose of this review is to seek potential solutions to best control the escalating costs of glaucoma care. The studies we selected for this review can be divided into four different categories: costs of diagnostic tests; costs of direct comparisons between drugs or laser and conventional surgery; patient-related factors (such as adherence); and general aspects regarding costs: theoretical models and calculations. It is challenging to find reliable studies concerning this subject matter. As patients are under the umbrellas of variously organized healthcare systems which span different cultures, the costs between countries are difficult to compare. However, one common aspect to lower costs in glaucoma care is to improve patient adherence. Theoretical models with actual patient studies could enable cost reductions by comparing multiple diagnostic and therapeutic scenarios. VIDEO ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/COOP/A22.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 3 6%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 17 36%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 28%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 11%
Computer Science 4 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 9%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 16 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 12 November 2020.
All research outputs
#10,527,998
of 34,518,147 outputs
Outputs from Current opinion in ophthalmology
#368
of 1,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,283
of 353,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current opinion in ophthalmology
#6
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,518,147 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,450 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 353,495 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 62% of its contemporaries.