ArticleBMC infectious diseases2009
Cost-effectiveness analysis of PCR for the rapid diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Disparities in model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of tuberculosis diagnosis: A systematic review.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluations of Diagnostic Tests in Brazil: How accurate are the results?Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2017Pooled it
- A systematic review of reported cost for smear and culture tests during multidrug-resistant tuberculosis treatment.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- Metagenomic next-generation sequencing for tuberculosis diagnosis: enhanced performance and cost-effectiveness.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Observational
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Rapid Test Compared to Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) in Patients with Acute Respiratory Syndrome.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2022Article
- Advanced CRISPR-Cas Effector Enzyme-Based Diagnostics for Infectious Diseases, Including COVID-19.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Genotype®MTBDRplus and Xpert®MTB/RIF in the diagnosis of tuberculosis and resistant tuberculosis: cost analysis in a tertiary referral hospital.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2020Article
- Endogenous Tuberculous Endophthalmitis and Panophthalmitis: A Systematic Review of Case Reports and Case Series.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020Article
- Cost analysis of smear microscopy and the Xpert assay for tuberculosis diagnosis: average turnaround time.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2020Article
- Polymerase Chain Reaction and Its Application in the Diagnosis of Infectious Keratitis.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2019Review
- Smear plus Detect-TB for a sensitive diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis: a cost-effectiveness analysis in an incarcerated population.BMC infectious diseases · 2014Article
- Challenges in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of new diagnostic tests for HIV-associated tuberculosis.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2013Article
- Article
- Is scale-up worth it? Challenges in economic analysis of diagnostic tests for tuberculosis.PLoS medicine · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTuberculosis is one of the most prominent health problems in the world, causing 1.75 million deaths each year. Rapid clinical diagnosis is important in patients who have co-morbidities such as Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection. Direct microscopy has low sensitivity and culture takes 3 to 6 weeks 123. Therefore, new tools for TB diagnosis are necessary, especially in health settings with a high prevalence of HIV/TB co-infection.
methodsIn a public reference TB/HIV hospital in Brazil, we compared the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic strategies for diagnosis of pulmonary TB: Acid fast bacilli smear microscopy by Ziehl-Neelsen staining (AFB smear) plus culture and AFB smear plus colorimetric test (PCR dot-blot).From May 2003 to May 2004, sputum was collected consecutively from PTB suspects attending the Parthenon Reference Hospital. Sputum samples were examined by AFB smear, culture, and PCR dot-blot. The gold standard was a positive culture combined with the definition of clinical PTB. Cost analysis included health services and patient costs.
resultsThe AFB smear plus PCR dot-blot require the lowest laboratory investment for equipment (US$ 20,000). The total screening costs are 3.8 times for AFB smear plus culture versus for AFB smear plus PCR dot blot costs (US$ 5,635,760 versus US$ 1,498, 660). Costs per correctly diagnosed case were US$ 50,773 and US$ 13,749 for AFB smear plus culture and AFB smear plus PCR dot-blot, respectively. AFB smear plus PCR dot-blot was more cost-effective than AFB smear plus culture, when the cost of treating all correctly diagnosed cases was considered. The cost of returning patients, which are not treated due to a negative result, to the health service, was higher in AFB smear plus culture than for AFB smear plus PCR dot-blot, US$ 374,778,045 and US$ 110,849,055, respectively.
conclusionAFB smear associated with PCR dot-blot associated has the potential to be a cost-effective tool in the fight against PTB for patients attended in the TB/HIV reference hospital.
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.