File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Do we need thyroid follow-up registers? A cost-effective study

TitleDo we need thyroid follow-up registers? A cost-effective study
Authors
Issue Date1982
PublisherThe Lancet Publishing Group. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/lancet
Citation
Lancet, 1982, v. 1 n. 8283, p. 1229-1233 How to Cite?
AbstractPatients who had received radioiodine treatment for hyperthyroidism were followed up by two different methods. 576 patients (group 1) were followed up conventionally by their general practitioners and as hospital outpatients. 609 similarly treated patients (group 2) were followed up by a computer-assisted system, the Scottish Automated Follow-up Register (S.A.F.U.R.). Follow-up in the two groups was compared on the basis of cost-effectiveness. On average, patients were seen for follow-up about once every 8 months if in group 1 and every 14 1/2 months in group 2. The overall cost of follow-up and treatment for group 2 patients was less than 60% of that for group 1 patients. A central follow-up register is reliable and cost-effective, particularly so when patients are dispersed over a wide area.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/151428
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 44.002
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 14.638
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorJones, SJen_US
dc.contributor.authorHedley, AJen_US
dc.contributor.authorCurtis, Ben_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-26T06:23:13Z-
dc.date.available2012-06-26T06:23:13Z-
dc.date.issued1982en_US
dc.identifier.citationLancet, 1982, v. 1 n. 8283, p. 1229-1233en_US
dc.identifier.issn0140-6736en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/151428-
dc.description.abstractPatients who had received radioiodine treatment for hyperthyroidism were followed up by two different methods. 576 patients (group 1) were followed up conventionally by their general practitioners and as hospital outpatients. 609 similarly treated patients (group 2) were followed up by a computer-assisted system, the Scottish Automated Follow-up Register (S.A.F.U.R.). Follow-up in the two groups was compared on the basis of cost-effectiveness. On average, patients were seen for follow-up about once every 8 months if in group 1 and every 14 1/2 months in group 2. The overall cost of follow-up and treatment for group 2 patients was less than 60% of that for group 1 patients. A central follow-up register is reliable and cost-effective, particularly so when patients are dispersed over a wide area.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherThe Lancet Publishing Group. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/lanceten_US
dc.relation.ispartofLanceten_US
dc.subject.meshCost-Benefit Analysisen_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshFollow-Up Studiesen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshHyperthyroidism - Economics - Radiotherapyen_US
dc.subject.meshHypothyroidism - Prevention & Controlen_US
dc.subject.meshIodine Radioisotopes - Therapeutic Useen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshRegistriesen_US
dc.subject.meshRisken_US
dc.subject.meshScotlanden_US
dc.titleDo we need thyroid follow-up registers? A cost-effective studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailHedley, AJ:hrmrajh@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityHedley, AJ=rp00357en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.pmid6122983-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0020061889en_US
dc.identifier.volume1en_US
dc.identifier.issue8283en_US
dc.identifier.spage1229en_US
dc.identifier.epage1233en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:A1982NS09000014-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridJones, SJ=7405931706en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHedley, AJ=7102584095en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridCurtis, B=7103163725en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats