Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28725164›Full record

ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2017

Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening and preventative cryotherapy at an HIV treatment clinic in Kenya.

Marita R Zimmermann, Elisabeth Vodicka, Joseph B Babigumira, Timothy Okech, Nelly Mugo, Samah Sakr, Louis P Garrison, Michael H Chung

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Marita R ZimmermannDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific St., HSB H-375, Box 357630, Seattle, WA 98195 USA.
Elisabeth VodickaDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific St., HSB H-375, Box 357630, Seattle, WA 98195 USA.
Joseph B BabigumiraDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, 325 Ninth Avenue, Box 359909, Seattle, WA 98104 USA.
Timothy OkechChandaria School of Business, United States International University-Africa, Nairobi, Kenya.
Nelly MugoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kenyatta National Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya.
Samah SakrCoptic Hospital, Coptic Hope Center, Nairobi, Kenya.
Louis P GarrisonDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific St., HSB H-375, Box 357630, Seattle, WA 98195 USA.
Michael H ChungDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, 325 Ninth Avenue, Box 359909, Seattle, WA 98104 USA.
University of Washington · USAlliant International University · USKenyatta National Hospital · KE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study evaluated the potential cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening in HIV treatment clinics in Nairobi, Kenya.

methodsA Markov model was used to project health outcomes and costs of cervical cancer screening and cryotherapy at an HIV clinic in Kenya using cryotherapy without screening, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), Papanicolaou smear (Pap), and testing for human papillomavirus (HPV). Direct and indirect medical and non-medical costs were examined from societal and clinic perspectives.

resultsCosts of cryotherapy, VIA, Pap, and HPV for women with CD4 200-500 cells/mL were $99, $196, $219, and $223 from a societal perspective and $19, $94, $124, and $113 from a clinic perspective, with 17.3, 17.1, 17.1, and 17.1 years of life expectancy, respectively. Women at higher CD4 counts (>500 cells/mL) given cryotherapy VIA, Pap, and HPV resulted in better life expectancies (19.9+ years) and lower cost (societal: $49, $99, $115, and $102; clinic: $13, $51, $71, and $56). VIA was less expensive than HPV unless HPV screening could be reduced to a single visit.

conclusionsPreventative cryotherapy was the least expensive strategy and resulted in highest projected life expectancy, while VIA was most cost-effective unless HPV could be reduced to a single visit.

Indexed as

Cervical cancerCost effectivenessCryotherapyHIVVIA

Identifiers

PMID28725164
PMCPMC5513032
OpenAlexW2736115461

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.