SynthesisBMC health services research2011
Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 6 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
54 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 125 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interferon-Gamma Release Assay Testing for Latent Tuberculosis Infection: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2024Pooled it
- Economic Evaluation of Screening Strategy for Latent Tuberculosis Infection (LTBI) in Contacts of Tuberculosis Patients: Systematic Review and Quality Assessment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic review of cost-utility analyses of screening methods in latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk populations.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Latent tuberculosis infection in transplant candidates: a systematic review and meta-analysis on TST and IGRA.Infection · 2019Pooled it
- Cost Effectiveness of Preventive Treatment for Tuberculosis in Special High-Risk Populations.PharmacoEconomics · 2015Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Screening for latent tuberculosis infection in patients with chronic kidney disease: a review of evidence and current practice in the UK.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Review
- Optimizing compliance with latent tuberculosis infection screening among kidney transplant recipients.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2025Article
- Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Expanded Targeted Testing and Treatment of Latent Tuberculosis Infection Among the Medicare Population in 2022.Annals of internal medicine · 2025Article
- Risk factors for latent tuberculosis infection clustering among the elderly: a population-based cross-sectional study in Eastern China.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in healthcare workers in Latin America and the Caribbean: systematic review and meta-analysis.Le infezioni in medicina · 2024Review
- Article
- A costing framework to compare tuberculosis infection tests.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Putative volatile biomarkers of bovine tuberculosis infection in breath, skin and feces of cattle.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2023Article
- Detection ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Preventive care recommendations to promote health equity.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2023Article
- Examining Test Cutoffs to Optimize Diagnosis of Latent Tuberculosis Infection in People Born Outside the United States.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2023Article
- Can Primary Care Drive Tuberculosis Elimination? Increasing Latent Tuberculosis Infection Testing and Treatment Initiation at a Community Health Center with a Large Non-U.S.-born Population.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2023Article
- The Global Expansion of LTBI Screening and Treatment Programs: Exploring Gaps in the Supporting Economic Evidence.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Comparison of three tests for latent tuberculosis infection in high-risk people in the USA: an observational cohort study.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterferon-γ release assays (IGRAs) for TB have the potential to replace the tuberculin skin test (TST) in screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). The higher per-test cost of IGRAs may be compensated for by lower post-screening costs (medical attention, chest x-rays and chemoprevention), given the higher specificity of the new tests as compared to that of the conventional TST. We conducted a systematic review of all publications that have addressed the cost or cost-effectiveness of IGRAs. The objective of this report was to undertake a structured review and critical appraisal of the methods used for the model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of TB screening programmes.
methodsUsing Medline and Embase, 75 publications that contained the terms "IGRA", "tuberculosis" and "cost" were identified. Of these, 13 were original studies on the costs or cost-effectiveness of IGRAs.
resultsThe 13 relevant studies come from five low-to-medium TB-incidence countries. Five studies took only the costs of screening into consideration, while eight studies analysed the cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies. Screening was performed in high-risk groups: close contacts, immigrants from high-incidence countries and healthcare workers. Two studies used the T-SPOT.TB as an IGRA and the other studies used the QuantiFERON-TB Gold and/or Gold In-Tube test. All 13 studies observed a decrease in costs when the IGRAs were used. Six studies compared the use of an IGRA as a test to confirm a positive TST (TST/IGRA strategy) to the use of an IGRA-only strategy. In four of these studies, the two-step strategy and in two the IGRA-only strategy was more cost-effective. Assumptions about TST specificity and progression risk after a positive test had the greatest influence on determining which IGRA strategy was more cost-effective.
conclusionThe available studies on cost-effectiveness provide strong evidence in support of the use of IGRAs in screening risk groups such as HCWs, immigrants from high-incidence countries and close contacts. So far, only two studies provide evidence that the IGRA-only screening strategy is more cost-effective.
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.