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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
Title |
The value of effective public tuberculosis treatment: an analysis of opportunity costs associated with multidrug resistant tuberculosis in Latvia
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, April 2013
|
DOI | 10.1186/1478-7547-11-9 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Thaddeus L Miller, Andra Cirule, Fernando A Wilson, Timothy H Holtz, Vija Riekstina, Kevin P Cain, Patrick K Moonan, Vaira Leimane |
Abstract |
A challenge to effective protection against tuberculosis is to sustain expensive and complex treatment public programs. Potential consequences of program failure include acquired drug resistance, poor patient outcomes, and potentially much higher system costs, however. In contrast, effective efforts have value illustrated by impacts they prevent. We compared the healthcare costs and treatment outcomes among multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and non MDR-TB patients in Latvia to identify benefits or costs associated with both. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Netherlands | 2 | 40% |
Mexico | 1 | 20% |
Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Malaysia | 1 | 2% |
Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
Brazil | 1 | 2% |
Canada | 1 | 2% |
United States | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 52 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 11 | 19% |
Researcher | 6 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
Other | 5 | 9% |
Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
Other | 11 | 19% |
Unknown | 14 | 25% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 39% |
Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 5% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
Other | 6 | 11% |
Unknown | 17 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 29 May 2013.
All research outputs
#8,475,150
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#261
of 533 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,064
of 209,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 533 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 209,588 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 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.