↓ Skip to main content

Costs associated with adverse events among acute patients

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Costs associated with adverse events among acute patients
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2605-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jakob Kjellberg, Rasmus Trap Wolf, Marie Kruse, Susanne R. Rasmussen, Jesper Vestergaard, Kent J. Nielsen, Kurt Rasmussen

Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyse the additional treatment costs of acute patients admitted to a Danish hospital who suffered an adverse event (AE) during in-hospital treatment. A matched case-control design was utilised. Using a combination of trigger words and patient record reviews 91 patients exposed to AEs were identified. Controls were identified among patients admitted to the same department during the same 20-month period. The matching was based on age, gender, and main diagnosis. Cost data was extracted from the Danish National Cost Database for four different periods after beginning of the admission. Patients exposed to an AE were associated with higher mean cost of EUR 9505 during their index admission (p = 0.014). For the period of 6 months from the beginning of the admission minus the admission itself they were associated with higher mean cost of EUR 4968 (p = 0.016). For the period from the 7th month until the end of the 12th month there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.104). For the total period of 12 month, patients exposed to an AE were associated with statistically significant higher mean cost of EUR 13,930 (p = 0.001). AEs are associated with significant hospital costs. Our findings suggest that a follow-up period of 6 months is necessary when investigating the costs associated with AEs among acute patients. Further research of specific types of AEs and the costs of preventing these types of AEs would improve the understanding of the relationship between adverse events and costs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 8 25%
Student > Bachelor 6 19%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Professor 3 9%
Other 7 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 38%
Unspecified 10 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 19%
Engineering 2 6%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 October 2017.
All research outputs
#7,219,023
of 12,016,495 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,597
of 3,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,956
of 266,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#72
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,016,495 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,897 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 266,056 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.