↓ Skip to main content

Health state utility values for diabetic retinopathy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
10 tweeters


8 Dimensions

Readers on

43 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.
Health state utility values for diabetic retinopathy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Systematic Reviews, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13643-015-0006-6
Pubmed ID

Christopher J Sampson, Jonathan C Tosh, Christopher P Cheyne, Deborah Broadbent, Marilyn James


People with diabetic retinopathy tend to have lower levels of health-related quality of life than individuals with no retinopathy. Strategies for screening and treatment have been shown to be cost-effective. In order to reduce the bias in cost-effectiveness estimates, systematic reviews of health state utility values (HSUVs) are crucial for health technology assessment and the development of decision analytic models. A review and synthesis of HSUVs for the different stages of disease progression in diabetic retinopathy has not previously been conducted. We will conduct a systematic review of the available literature that reports HSUVs for people with diabetic retinopathy, in correspondence with current stage of disease progression and/or visual acuity. We will search Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination Database, and EconLit to identify relevant English-language articles. Data will subsequently be synthesized using linear mixed effects modeling meta-regression. Additionally, reported disease severity classifications will be mapped to a four-level grading scale for diabetic retinopathy. The systematic review and meta-analysis will provide important evidence for future model-based economic evaluations of technologies for diabetic retinopathy. The meta-regression will enable the estimation of utility values at different disease stages for patients with particular characteristics and will also highlight where the design of the study and HSUV instrument have influenced the reported utility values. We believe this protocol to be the first of its kind to be published. PROSPERO CRD42014012891.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 5%
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 40 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Other 5 12%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 30%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Psychology 2 5%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 5 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 20 August 2020.
All research outputs
of 15,882,608 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
of 1,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 218,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,882,608 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,410 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 218,448 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them