↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Rural‐Urban Differences in Costs of End‐of‐Life Care for the Last 6 Months of Life Among Patients with Breast, Lung, or Colorectal Cancer
Published in
Journal of Rural Health, April 2018
DOI 10.1111/jrh.12301
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine rural-urban differences in utilization and expenditures in the last 6 months of life for patients with breast, lung, or colorectal cancer. The study used a 5% sample of the 2013 Medicare Research Identifiable Files to study utilization and expenditures for beneficiaries with breast, lung, or colorectal cancer during the last 6 months before death (n = 6,214). End of life expenditures were calculated as the sum of total Medicare expenditures for inpatient, outpatient, physician, home health, hospice, and skilled nursing facility costs during the last 6 months of life. For each type of cancer, total Medicare expenditures in the last 6 months of life were lower for rural decedents compared to their urban counterparts. During the last 6 months of life, median Medicare expenditures were lower for rural decedents for breast cancer ($21,839 vs $25,698), lung cancer ($22,814 vs $27,635), and colorectal cancer ($24,156 vs $28,035; all differences significant at P < .05). In adjusted models, care for rural decedents was less costly than urban decedents for breast, lung, and colorectal cancer, respectively. Our findings indicate that Medicare expenditures are lower for rural beneficiaries with each type of cancer than urban beneficiaries, even after adjusting for age, gender, race, dual eligibility, region, chronic conditions, and type of service utilization. The findings from this study can be useful for policymakers in developing programs and resource allocation decisions that impact rural beneficiaries.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 12%
Researcher 7 9%
Professor 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 5%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 30 41%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 11%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Unspecified 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 34 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 April 2020.
All research outputs
#21,346,868
of 34,040,673 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Rural Health
#832
of 1,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,580
of 370,471 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Rural Health
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,040,673 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 370,471 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.