Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29562992›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease2018

Economic analysis of CDC's culture- and smear-based tuberculosis instructions for Filipino immigrants.

B Maskery, D L Posey, M S Coleman, R Asis, W Zhou, J A Painter, L T Wingate, M Roque, M S Cetron

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

B MaskeryDivision of Global Migration and Quarantine, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
D L PoseyDivision of Global Migration and Quarantine, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
M S ColemanDivision of Global Migration and Quarantine, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
R AsisSt Lukes Medical Center Extension Clinic, Metro Manila, The Philippines.
W ZhouDivision of Global Migration and Quarantine, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
J A PainterDivision of Global Migration and Quarantine, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
L T WingateDivision of Global Migration and Quarantine, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
M RoqueSt Lukes Medical Center Extension Clinic, Metro Manila, The Philippines.
M S CetronDivision of Global Migration and Quarantine, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

settingIn 2007, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) revised its tuberculosis (TB) technical instructions for panel physicians who administer mandatory medical examinations among US-bound immigrants. Many US-bound immigrants come from the Philippines, a high TB prevalence country.

objectiveTo quantify economic and health impacts of smear- vs. culture-based TB screening.

designDecision tree modeling was used to compare three Filipino screening programs: 1) no screening, 2) smear-based screening, and 3) culture-based screening. The model incorporated pre-departure TB screening results from Filipino panel physicians and CDC databases with post-arrival follow-up outcomes. Costs (2013 $US) were examined from societal, immigrant, US Public Health Department and hospitalization perspectives.

resultsWith no screening, an annual cohort of 35 722 Filipino immigrants would include an estimated 450 TB patients with 264 hospitalizations, at a societal cost of US$9.90 million. Culture-based vs. smear-based screening would result in fewer imported cases (80.9 vs. 310.5), hospitalizations (19.7 vs. 68.1), and treatment costs (US$1.57 million vs. US$4.28 million). Societal screening costs, including US follow-up, were greater for culture-based screening (US$5.98 million) than for smear-based screening (US$3.38 million). Culture-based screening requirements increased immigrant costs by 61% (US$1.7 million), but reduced costs for the US Public Health Department (22%, US$750 000) and of hospitalization (70%, US$1 020 000).

conclusionCulture-based screening reduced imported TB and US costs among Filipino immigrants.

Indexed as

Emigrants and ImmigrantsAdolescentAdultAgedCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.ChildChild, PreschoolCost-Benefit AnalysisDatabases, FactualDecision TreesFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMale

Identifiers

PMID29562992
PMCPMC6390485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.