Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2011
Screening for sickle cell and thalassaemia in primary care: a cost-effectiveness study.
Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Carrier Screening Programs for Cystic Fibrosis, Fragile X Syndrome, Hemoglobinopathies and Thalassemia, and Spinal Muscular Atrophy: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2023Pooled it
- EHA Recommendations for preconceptual and antenatal screening and prenatal diagnosis for hemoglobinopathies.HemaSphere · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Different Prenatal Screening Strategies for the Prevention of Severe Thalassemia in Thailand.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2025Article
- Development of a conceptual model for evaluating new non-curative and curative therapies for sickle cell disease.PloS one · 2022Article
- The Use of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Sickle Cell Disease: A Critical Review of the Literature.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Review
- Article
- Haemoglobinopathies in Europe: health & migration policy perspectives.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2014Article
- Screening for sickle cell and thalassaemia in primary care: a cost-effectiveness study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012Article
- Commissioning maternity care: little room for manoeuvre?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHaemoglobinopathies, including sickle cell disease and thalassaemia (SCT), are inherited disorders of haemoglobin. Antenatal screening for SCT rarely occurs before 10 weeks of pregnancy.
aimTo explore the cost-effectiveness of offering SCT screening in a primary care setting, during the pregnancy confirmation visit. DESIGN AND
settingA model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of inner-city areas with a high proportion of residents from ethnic minority groups.
methodComparison was made of three SCT screening approaches: 'primary care parallel' (primary care screening with test offered to mother and father together); 'primary care sequential (primary care screening with test offered to the mother and then the father only if the mother is a carrier); and 'midwife care' (sequential screening at the first midwife consultation). The model was populated with data from the SHIFT (Screening for Haemoglobinopathies In First Trimester) trial and other sources.
resultsCompared to midwife care, primary care sequential had a higher NHS cost of £34,000 per 10,000 pregnancies (95% confidence interval [CI] = £15,000 to £51,000) and an increase of 2623 women screened (95% CI: 1359 to 4495), giving a cost per additional woman screened by 10 weeks of £13. Primary care parallel was dominated by primary care sequential, with both higher costs and fewer women screened.
conclusionThe policy judgement is whether an earlier opportunity for informed reproductive choice has a value of at least £13. Further work is required to understand the value attached to earlier informed reproductive choices.
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.