The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Cost-Minimization of Mabthera Intravenous Versus Subcutaneous Administration
Open accessOverview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Similar conclusions were also drawn from other time and motion and cost-effectiveness studies.
“Similar conclusions were also drawn from other time and motion and cost-effectiveness studies [51–54].”
From Subcutaneous Administration of Biotherapeutics: An Overview of Current Challenges and Opportunities (2018) · cites this paper as [53]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Bax, P., & Postma, M. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Groningen (NL)
- ORCID
- Postma, M.J.
- Venue
- Value in Health
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-11
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- A390-A391
- ISSN
- 1098-3015 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2149341984
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Value in Health (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
- Keywords
- rituximab, intravenous administration, subcutaneous administration, cost minimization, drug administration costs, hematologic patients
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
