↓ Skip to main content

Estimating the effectiveness of a hospital’s interventions in India: impact of the choice of disability weights

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Estimating the effectiveness of a hospital’s interventions in India: impact of the choice of disability weights
Published in
Bulletin of the World Health Organization, May 2015
DOI 10.2471/blt.14.147900
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susmita Chatterjee, Richard A Gosselin

Abstract

To calculate the effect of using two different sets of disability weights for estimates of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted by interventions delivered in one hospital in India. DALYs averted by surgical and non-surgical interventions were estimated for 3445 patients who were admitted to a 106-bed private hospital in a semi-urban area of northern India in 2012-2013. Disability weights were taken from global burden of disease (GBD) studies. We used the GBD 1990 disability weights and then repeated all of our calculations using the corresponding GBD 2010 weights. DALYs averted were estimated for surgical and non-surgical interventions using disability weight, risk of death and/or disability, and effectiveness of treatment. The disability weights assigned in the GBD 1990 study to the sequelae of conditions such as cataract, cancer and injuries were substantially different to those assigned in the GBD 2010 study. These differences in weights led to large differences in estimates of DALYs averted. For all surgical interventions delivered to this patient cohort, 11 517 DALYs were averted if we used the GDB 1990 weights and 9401 DALYs were averted if we used the GDB 2010 disability weights. For non-surgical interventions 5168 DALYs were averted using the GDB 1990 disability weights and 5537 DALYS were averted using the GDB 2010 disability weights. Estimates of the effectiveness of hospital interventions depend upon the disability weighting used. Researchers and resource allocators need to be very cautious when comparing results from studies that have used different sets of disability weights.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Other 5 9%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 10 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 8%
Psychology 2 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 15 28%
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 26 March 2018.
All research outputs
#8,783,469
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of the World Health Organization
#83
of 286 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,094
of 280,795 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of the World Health Organization
#12
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 286 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 280,795 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.