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 |
Cost-effectiveness of a coronary heart disease secondary prevention program in patients with myocardial infarction: results from a randomised controlled trial (ProActive Heart)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2261-13-33 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Erika Turkstra, Anna L Hawkes, Brian Oldenburg, Paul A Scuffham |
| Abstract |
BACKGROUND: Participation in coronary heart disease (CHD) secondary prevention programs is low. Telephone-delivered CHD secondary prevention programs may overcome the treatment gap. The telephone-based health coaching ProActive Heart trial intervention has previously been shown to be effective for improving health-related quality of life, physical activity, body mass index, diet, alcohol intake and anxiety. As a secondary aim, the current study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the ProActive Heart intervention compared to usual care. METHODS: 430 adult myocardial infarction patients were randomised to a six-month CHD secondary prevention 'health coaching' intervention or 'usual care' control group. Primary outcome variables were health-related quality of life (SF-36) and physical activity (Active Australia Survey). Data were collected at baseline, six-months (post-intervention) and 12 months (six-months post-intervention completion) for longer term effects. Cost-effectiveness data [health utility (SF-6D) and health care utilisation] were collected using self-reported (general practitioner, specialist, other health professionals, health services, and medication) and claims data (hospitalisation rates). Intervention effects are presented as mean differences (95% CI), p-value. RESULTS: Improvements in health status (SF-6D) were observed in both groups, with no significant difference between the groups at six [0.012 (-0.016, 0.041), p = 0.372] or 12 months [0.011 (-0.028, 0.051) p = 0.738]. Patients in the health coaching group were significantly more likely to be admitted to hospital due to causes unrelated to cardiovascular disease (p = 0.042). The overall cost for the health coaching group was higher ($10,574 vs. $8,534, p = 0.021), mainly due to higher hospitalisation (both CHD and non-CHD) costs ($6,841 vs. $4,984, p = 0.036). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $85,423 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: There was no intervention effect measured using the SF-36/SF-6D and ProActive Heart resulted in significantly increased costs. The cost per QALY gained from ProActive Heart was high and above acceptable limits compared to usual care. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| India | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 184 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 38 | 20% |
| Researcher | 29 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 6% |
| Other | 33 | 18% |
| Unknown | 36 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 49 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 26 | 14% |
| Psychology | 23 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 24 | 13% |
| Unknown | 52 | 28% |
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 07 May 2013.
All research outputs
#6,121,494
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#286
of 1,594 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,946
of 192,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#2
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,594 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 192,823 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.