↓ Skip to main content

10-Year Resource Utilization and Costs for Cardiovascular Care

Overview of attention for article published in JACC, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
10-Year Resource Utilization and Costs for Cardiovascular Care
Published in
JACC, March 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.12.064
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) imparts a heavy economic burden on the U.S. health care system. Evidence regarding the long-term costs after comprehensive CVD screening is limited. This study calculated 10-year health care costs for 6,814 asymptomatic participants enrolled in MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis), a registry sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health. Cumulative 10-year costs for CVD medications, office visits, diagnostic procedures, coronary revascularization, and hospitalizations were calculated from detailed follow-up data. Costs were derived by using Medicare nationwide and zip code-specific costs, inflation corrected, discounted at 3% per year, and presented in 2014 U.S. dollars. Risk factor prevalence increased dramatically and, by 10 years, diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia was reported in 19%, 57%, and 53%, respectively. Self-reported symptoms (i.e., chest pain or shortness of breath) were common (approximately 40% of enrollees). At 10 years, approximately one-third of enrollees reported having an echocardiogram or exercise test, whereas 7% underwent invasive coronary angiography. These utilization patterns resulted in 10-year health care costs of $23,142. The largest proportion of costs was associated with CVD medication use (78%). Approximately $2 of every $10 were spent for outpatient visits and diagnostic testing among the elderly, obese, those with a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level >3 mg/l, or coronary artery calcium score (CACS) ≥400. Costs varied widely from <$7,700 for low-risk (Framingham risk score <6%, 0 CACS, and normal glucose measurements at baseline) to >$35,800 for high-risk (persons with diabetes, Framingham risk score ≥20%, or CACS ≥400) subgroups. Among high-risk enrollees, CVD costs accounted for $74 million of the $155 million consumed by MESA participants. Longitudinal patterns of health care resource use after screening revealed new evidence on the economic burden of treatment and testing patterns not previously reported. Maintenance of a healthy population has the potential to markedly reduce the economic burden of CVD among asymptomatic individuals.

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 13 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 108 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 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Postgraduate 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Researcher 8 7%
Other 5 5%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 47 44%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 13%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 4%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 49 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 30 July 2022.
All research outputs
#1,235,331
of 34,404,538 outputs
Outputs from JACC
#3,079
of 22,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,901
of 373,609 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC
#100
of 424 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,404,538 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,478 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 373,609 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 424 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.