↓ Skip to main content

Cost and cost-effectiveness of soil-transmitted helminth treatment programmes: systematic review and research needs

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
175 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.
Title
Cost and cost-effectiveness of soil-transmitted helminth treatment programmes: systematic review and research needs
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13071-015-0885-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hugo C. Turner, James E. Truscott, T. Déirdre Hollingsworth, Alison A. Bettis, Simon J. Brooker, Roy M. Anderson

Abstract

In this time of rapidly expanding mass drug administration (MDA) coverage and the new commitments for soil-transmitted helminth (STH) control, it is essential that resources are allocated in an efficient manner to have the greatest impact. However, many questions remain regarding how best to deliver STH treatment programmes; these include which age-groups should be targeted and how often. To perform further analyses to investigate what the most cost-effective control strategies are in different settings, accurate cost data for targeting different age groups at different treatment frequencies (in a range of settings) are essential. Using the electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, and ISI Web of Knowledge, we perform a systematic review of costing studies and cost-effectiveness evaluations for potential STH treatment strategies. We use this review to highlight research gaps and outline the key future research needs. We identified 29 studies reporting costs of STH treatment and 17 studies that investigated its cost-effectiveness. The majority of these pertained to programmes only targeting school-aged children (SAC), with relatively few studies investigating alternative preventive chemotherapy (PCT) treatment strategies. The methods of cost data collection, analysis and reporting were highly variable among the different studies. Only four of the costing studies were found to have high applicability for use in forthcoming economic evaluations. There are also very few studies quantifying the costs of increasing the treatment frequency. The absence of cost data and inconsistencies in the collection and analysis methods constitutes a major research gap for STH control. Detailed and accurate costs of targeting different age groups or increasing treatment frequency will be essential to formulate cost-effective public health policy. Defining the most cost-effective control strategies in different settings is of high significance during this period of expanding MDA coverage and new resource commitments for STH control.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 173 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 20%
Researcher 28 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 6%
Lecturer 10 6%
Other 30 17%
Unknown 42 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 7%
Social Sciences 10 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 9 5%
Other 37 21%
Unknown 50 29%
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 22 February 2018.
All research outputs
#7,528,244
of 22,974,684 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#1,870
of 5,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,471
of 263,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#37
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,974,684 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 263,389 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 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 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 67% of its contemporaries.