ArticleSexually transmitted infections2003
Estimating the costs and benefits of screening monogamous, heterosexual couples for unrecognised infection with herpes simplex virus type 2.
Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Healthcare resource utilisation pattern and costs associated with herpes simplex virus diagnosis and management: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- One to one interventions to reduce sexually transmitted infections and under the age of 18 conceptions: a systematic review of the economic evaluations.Sexually transmitted infections · 2007Pooled it
- Herpes Simplex Virus Type 2 Screening in Persons with and Without HIV: Evidence, Challenges, and Future Directions.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2026Review
- Racial/ethnic disparities in undiagnosed infection with herpes simplex virus type 2.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2010Article
- Health related quality of life in genital herpes: a pilot comparison of measures.Sexually transmitted infections · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesHerpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) is the most common cause of ulcerative genital disease in the United States, but infection is commonly unrecognised. Serological screening tests could identify discordantly infected couples and permit targeted interventions to limit HSV-2 transmission. Our objective was to evaluate the projected cost effectiveness of strategies to prevent HSV-2 transmission in couples with no history of HSV-2 infection.
methodsWe created a mathematical model to simulate the natural history and costs of HSV-2 transmission, and the expected impact of HSV-2 prevention strategies in monogamous, heterosexual couples. Strategies evaluated included (i) no screening; (ii) universal condom use; and (iii) serological screening for HSV-2 with condom use targeted to discordant couples. Screening tests considered included western blot (WB), ELISA, and ELISA with confirmation of positive test results using WB (ELISA-->WB).
resultsCompared to no screening, the use of ELISA-->WB prevented 38 future infections per 1000 couples, with a cost effectiveness ratio of $8200 per infection averted. The use of WB in all couples had an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of $63 600 per infection averted. Strategies of ELISA alone and universal condom use were not cost effective. The cost effectiveness of ELISA-->WB improved with increasing prevalence of HSV-2, but worsened with decreasing condom compliance. Screening with ELISA alone was a reasonable strategy only when ELISA specificity increased to 99%.
conclusionsSerological screening for unrecognised HSV-2 infection in monogamous, heterosexual couples is expected to decrease the incidence of HSV-2 infection, but increase healthcare costs. For couples choosing to be screened, a two step testing strategy (ELISA-->WB) is recommended. Recommendations for a national policy to conduct serological screening will depend on the value placed on averting an incident HSV-2 infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.