Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23741348›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of expanded voluntary HIV testing in India.

Kartik K Venkatesh, Jessica E Becker, Nagalingeswaran Kumarasamy, Yoriko M Nakamura, Kenneth H Mayer, Elena Losina, Soumya Swaminathan, Timothy P Flanigan, Rochelle P Walensky, Kenneth A Freedberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The Cost-effectiveness of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Preexposure Prophylaxis and HIV Testing Strategies in High-risk Groups in India.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Evidence for optimal HIV screening and testing intervals in HIV-negative individuals from various risk groups: A systematic review.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2018
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Kartik K VenkateshDivision of Infectious Disease, Department of Medicine, Alpert Medical School, Brown University/Miriam Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America.
Jessica E Becker
Nagalingeswaran Kumarasamy
Yoriko M Nakamura
Kenneth H Mayer
Elena Losina
Soumya Swaminathan
Timothy P Flanigan
Rochelle P Walensky
Kenneth A Freedberg

Funding

Optimizing HIV Care in Less Developed CountriesR01AI058736 · NIAID · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI Kenneth Alan Freedberg, Emily Parker Hyle · 2004 to 2026
$21.5M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI058736
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite expanding access to antiretroviral therapy (ART), most of the estimated 2.3 to 2.5 million HIV-infected individuals in India remain undiagnosed. The questions of whom to test for HIV and at what frequency remain unclear.

methodsWe used a simulation model of HIV testing and treatment to examine alternative HIV screening strategies: 1) current practice, 2) one-time, 3) every five years, and 4) annually; and we applied these strategies to three population scenarios: 1) the general Indian population ("national population"), i.e. base case (HIV prevalence 0.29%; incidence 0.032/100 person-years [PY]); 2) high-prevalence districts (HIV prevalence 0.8%; incidence 0.088/100 PY), and 3) high-risk groups (HIV prevalence 5.0%; incidence 0.552/100 PY). Cohort characteristics reflected Indians reporting for HIV testing, with a median age of 35 years, 66% men, and a mean CD4 count of 305 cells/µl. The cost of a rapid HIV test was $3.33. Outcomes included life expectancy, HIV-related direct medical costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and secondary transmission benefits. The threshold for "cost-effective" was defined as 3x the annual per capita GDP of India ($3,900/year of life saved [YLS]), or for "very cost-effective" was <1x the annual per capita GDP ($1,300/YLS).

resultsCompared to current practice, one-time screening was very cost-effective in the national population (ICER: $1,100/YLS), high-prevalence districts (ICER: $800/YLS), and high-risk groups (ICER: $800/YLS). Screening every five years in the national population (ICER: $1,900/YLS) and annual screening in high-prevalence districts (ICER: $1,900/YLS) and high-risk groups (ICER: $1,800/YLS) were also cost-effective. Results were most sensitive to costs of care and linkage-to-care.

conclusionsIn India, voluntary HIV screening of the national population every five years offers substantial clinical benefit and is cost-effective. Annual screening is cost-effective among high-risk groups and in high-prevalence districts nationally. Routine HIV screening in India should be implemented.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalAdultCD4 Lymphocyte CountCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansIndiaLife ExpectancyMaleMass ScreeningPrevalenceRisk-Taking

Identifiers

PMID23741348
PMCPMC3669338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.