↓ Skip to main content

You Only Die Once: Accounting for Multi-Attributable Mortality Risks in Multi-Disease Models for Health-Economic Analyses

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Decision Making, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
You Only Die Once: Accounting for Multi-Attributable Mortality Risks in Multi-Disease Models for Health-Economic Analyses
Published in
Medical Decision Making, July 2016
DOI 10.1177/0272989x16658661
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Mortality rates in Markov models, as used in health economic studies, are often estimated from summary statistics that allow limited adjustment for confounders. If interventions are targeted at multiple diseases and/or risk factors, these mortality rates need to be combined in a single model. This requires them to be mutually adjusted to avoid 'double counting' of mortality. We present a mathematical modeling approach to describe the joint effect of mutually dependent risk factors and chronic diseases on mortality in a consistent manner. Most importantly, this approach explicitly allows the use of readily available external data sources. An additional advantage is that existing models can be smoothly expanded to encompass more diseases/risk factors. To illustrate the usefulness of this method and how it should be implemented, we present a health economic model that links risk factors for diseases to mortality from these diseases, and describe the causal chain running from these risk factors (e.g., obesity) through to the occurrence of disease (e.g., diabetes, CVD) and death. Our results suggest that these adjustment procedures may have a large impact on estimated mortality rates. An improper adjustment of the mortality rates could result in an underestimation of disease prevalence and, therefore, disease costs.

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 36 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 %
France 1 3%
Unknown 35 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Researcher 6 17%
Other 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Librarian 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 10 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 8%
Decision Sciences 3 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 12 33%
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 14 September 2026.
All research outputs
#8,273,004
of 29,353,077 outputs
Outputs from Medical Decision Making
#710
of 1,625 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,864
of 316,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Decision Making
#23
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,353,077 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,625 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 316,925 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 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 54% of its contemporaries.