| Title |
The quality of economic studies of cancer pharmacogenomics: a quantitative appraisal of the evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1586/14737167.2013.838023 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mo Yang, Dhaval S Patil, Waqas Tufail, Amalia M Issa |
| Abstract |
This study evaluated the quality of health economic studies of cancer pharmacogenomics (PGx). A systematic search of the literature for economic studies of PGx was conducted in four common cancers. Evaluation of study quality was carried out using the quality of health economic studies instrument. Thirty-nine articles met our eligibility criteria and were selected and accepted for further statistical analyses. The majority of articles (85%) were studies focusing on breast cancer. The overall weighted mean quality score was 85.10, with a range from 21 to 100. Eighty-seven percent of articles were categorized as good quality, whereas some 10 and 3% were categorized as moderate and poor quality, respectively. The quality of economic studies of cancer PGx is generally good but varied widely. We identified several attributes that are predictive of quality. Our findings may be useful for oncologists, health economists and decision makers interested in evaluating studies involving PGx. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 22 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 25% |
| Researcher | 5 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 6 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 21% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 8% |
| Psychology | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 21% |
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 27 October 2013.
All research outputs
#15,739,529
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
#450
of 765 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,720
of 318,831 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
#161
of 213 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 765 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 318,831 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 213 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.