Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25478877›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Finding a needle in the haystack: the costs and cost-effectiveness of syphilis diagnosis and treatment during pregnancy to prevent congenital syphilis in Kalomo District of Zambia.

Bruce A Larson, Deophine Lembela-Bwalya, Rachael Bonawitz, Emily E Hammond, Donald M Thea, Julie Herlihy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Observational
  7. Low syphilis treatment rates and associated birth outcomes in pregnant women with and without HIV in Zambia: A cohort study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The cost-effectiveness of 10 antenatal syphilis screening and treatment approaches in Peru, Tanzania, and Zambia.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2015
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bruce A LarsonCenter for Global Health and Development, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Deophine Lembela-BwalyaZambia Center for Applied Health Research and Development, Lusaka, Zambia.
Rachael BonawitzCenter for Global Health and Development, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States of America; Department of Pediatrics, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Emily E HammondCenter for Global Health and Development, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Donald M TheaCenter for Global Health and Development, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Julie HerlihyCenter for Global Health and Development, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States of America; Department of Pediatrics, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Boston University · USBoston Medical Center · US

Funding

NCHHSTP CDC HHS U2G PS001418PEPFARPHS HHS 5U2GPS001418-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn March 2012, The Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation trained maternal and child health workers in Southern Province of Zambia to use a new rapid syphilis test (RST) during routine antenatal care. A recent study by Bonawitz et al. (2014) evaluated the impact of this roll out in Kalomo District. This paper estimates the costs and cost-effectiveness from the provider's perspective under the actual conditions observed during the first year of the RST roll out.

methodsInformation on materials used and costs were extracted from program records. A decision-analytic model was used to evaluate the costs (2012 USD) and cost-effectiveness. Basic parameters needed for the model were based on the results from the evaluation study.

resultsDuring the evaluation study, 62% of patients received a RST, and 2.8% of patients tested were positive (and 10.4% of these were treated). Even with very high RST sensitivity and specificity (98%), true prevalence of active syphilis would be substantially less (estimated at <0.7%). For 1,000 new ANC patients, costs of screening and treatment were estimated at $2,136, and the cost per avoided disability-adjusted-life year lost (DALY) was estimated at $628. Costs change little if all positives are treated (because prevalence is low and treatment costs are small), but the cost-per-DALY avoided falls to just $66. With full adherence to guidelines, costs increase to $3,174 per 1,000 patients and the cost-per-DALY avoided falls to $60.

conclusionsScreening for syphilis is only useful for reducing adverse birth outcomes if patients testing positive are actually treated. Even with very low prevalence of syphilis (a needle in the haystack), cost effectiveness improves dramatically if those found positive are treated; additional treatment costs little but DALYs avoided are substantial. Without treatment, the needle is essentially found and thrown back into the haystack.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisPrenatal DiagnosisAdultChildFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansMass ScreeningPregnancyPregnancy Complications, InfectiousSyphilis, CongenitalSyphilis SerodiagnosisZambia

Identifiers

PMID25478877
PMCPMC4257564
OpenAlexW2052420840

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.