Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27941974›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Cost Evaluation of Dried Blood Spot Home Sampling as Compared to Conventional Sampling for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Children.

Lisa C Martial, Rob E Aarnoutse, Michiel F Schreuder, Stefanie S Henriet, Roger J M Brüggemann, Manuela A Joore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Analytical chemistry · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Observational
  19. Review
  20. 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.

Lisa C MartialRadboud university medical center, Department of Pharmacy, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Rob E AarnoutseRadboud university medical center, Department of Pharmacy, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Michiel F SchreuderRadboudumc Amalia Children's Hospital, Radboud university medical center, Department of Pediatric Nephrology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Stefanie S HenrietRadboudumc Amalia Children's Hospital, Radboud university medical center, Department of Pediatric Infectious Diseases and Immunology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Roger J M BrüggemannRadboud university medical center, Department of Pharmacy, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Manuela A JooreMaastricht University Medical Center, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment (KEMTA), Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dried blood spot (DBS) sampling for the purpose of therapeutic drug monitoring can be an attractive alternative for conventional blood sampling, especially in children. This study aimed to compare all costs involved in conventional sampling versus DBS home sampling in two pediatric populations: renal transplant patients and hemato-oncology patients. Total costs were computed from a societal perspective by adding up healthcare cost, patient related costs and costs related to loss of productivity of the caregiver. Switching to DBS home sampling was associated with a cost reduction of 43% for hemato-oncology patients (€277 to €158) and 61% for nephrology patients (€259 to €102) from a societal perspective (total costs) per blood draw. From a healthcare perspective, costs reduced with 7% for hemato-oncology patients and with 21% for nephrology patients. Total savings depend on the number of hospital visits that can be avoided by using home sampling instead of conventional sampling.

Indexed as

Costs and Cost AnalysisDried Blood Spot TestingDrug MonitoringHome Care ServicesAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth Care CostsHumans

Identifiers

PMID27941974
PMCPMC5152813

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.