A study of cross-border E-commerce research trends: Based on knowledge mapping and literature analysis.

As a result of the trend toward economic globalization, the vigorous development of cross-border e-commerce has attracted many scholars to study this field, involving many related fields, such as consumer behavior, advertising, information systems, and supply chain management. Throughout the existing literature, it can be found that most of the research focuses on certain influencing factors of the development of cross-border e-commerce, and there is no systematic and macro- overview of the development trend of research in this field in recent years, nor the integration and analysis of keywords. Given that the research in the field of cross-border e-commerce is fragmented to a large extent, to effectively explore the research trend in this field, we must understand the current situation of cross-border e-commerce. Systematic bibliometric analysis can solve this problem by providing publishing trends and information on various topics. Therefore, based on the scientific database web, this study collected 198 references related to cross-border e-commerce from 2016 to 2021, briefly introduced the current situation and development trend of cross-border e-commerce, visually analyzed and refined the journals, authors, research institutions, countries, publication years, keywords, citations of academic publications in this field, and other key information, and summarized the development trend and path of CEBC in the existing research. It is helpful for researchers to solve the current research gap, understand the future research direction in this field, and help academia establish a strict knowledge system.

A cost-utility analysis of lung cancer screening and the additional benefits of incorporating smoking cessation interventions.

BACKGROUND: A 2011 report from the National Lung Screening Trial indicates that three annual low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screenings for lung cancer reduced lung cancer mortality by 20% compared to chest X-ray among older individuals at high risk for lung cancer. Discussion has shifted from clinical proof to financial feasibility. The goal of this study was to determine whether LDCT screening for lung cancer in a commercially-insured population (aged 50-64) at high risk for lung cancer is cost-effective and to quantify the additional benefits of incorporating smoking cessation interventions in a lung cancer screening program. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The current study builds upon a previous simulation model to estimate the cost-utility of annual, repeated LDCT screenings over 15 years in a high risk hypothetical cohort of 18 million adults between age 50 and 64 with 30+ pack-years of smoking history. In the base case, the lung cancer screening intervention cost $27.8 billion over 15 years and yielded 985,284 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained for a cost-utility ratio of $28,240 per QALY gained. Adding smoking cessation to these annual screenings resulted in increases in both the costs and QALYs saved, reflected in cost-utility ratios ranging from $16,198 per QALY gained to $23,185 per QALY gained. Annual LDCT lung cancer screening in this high risk population remained cost-effective across all sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study indicate that repeat annual lung cancer screening in a high risk cohort of adults aged 50-64 is highly cost-effective. Offering smoking cessation interventions with the annual screening program improved the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening between 20% and 45%. The cost-utility ratios estimated in this study were in line with other accepted cancer screening interventions and support inclusion of annual LDCT screening for lung cancer in a high risk population in clinical recommendations.

An actuarial analysis shows that offering lung cancer screening as an insurance benefit would save lives at relatively low cost.

Lung cancer screening is not established as a public health practice, yet the results of a recent large randomized controlled trial showed that screening with low-dose spiral computed tomography reduces lung cancer mortality. Using actuarial models, this study estimated the costs and benefits of annual lung cancer screening offered as a commercial insurance benefit in the high-risk US population ages 50-64. Assuming current commercial reimbursement rates for treatment, we found that screening would cost about $1 per insured member per month in 2012 dollars. The cost per life-year saved would be below $19,000, an amount that compares favorably with screening for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancers. Our results suggest that commercial insurers should consider lung cancer screening of high-risk individuals to be high-value coverage and provide it as a benefit to people who are at least fifty years old and have a smoking history of thirty pack-years or more. We also believe that payers and patients should demand screening from high-quality, low-cost providers, thus helping set an example of efficient system innovation.