ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2019
Cost Effectiveness of New Diagnostic Tools for Cutaneous Leishmaniasis in Afghanistan.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of CL Detect rapid-immunochromatographic test for cutaneous leishmaniasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnosis of visceral and cutaneous leishmaniasis using loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) protocols: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Parasites & vectors · 2022Pooled it
- Evidence Gaps and Global Patterns in Leishmaniasis Control: A Scoping Review of Clinical, Diagnostic, and Treatment Strategies.Journal of parasitology research · 2026Review
- Cutaneous leishmaniasis in Afghanistan.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2025Review
- Micro-costing from healthcare professional's perspective and acceptability of cutaneous leishmaniasis diagnostic tools in Morocco: A mixed-methods study.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Recombinase-based amplification coupled with lateral flow chromatography for the specific and sensitive detection and identification ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Laboratory diagnostics for human Leishmania infections: a polymerase chain reaction-focussed review of detection and identification methods.Parasites & vectors · 2022Review
- Glycosylated gold nanoparticles in point of care diagnostics: from aggregation to lateral flow.Chemical Society reviews · 2022Review
- Lateral Flow Glyco-Assays for the Rapid and Low-Cost Detection of Lectins-Polymeric Linkers and Particle Engineering Are Essential for Selectivity and Performance.Advanced healthcare materials · 2022Article
- Glycan-Based Flow-Through Device for the Detection of SARS-COV-2.ACS sensors · 2021Article
- Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP): An advanced molecular point-of-care technique for the detection of Leishmania infection.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesCutaneous leishmaniasis is responsible for chronic and disfiguring skin lesions resulting in morbidity and social stigma. The gold standard to diagnose cutaneous leishmaniasis is microscopy but has a variable sensitivity and requires trained personnel. Using four scenarios, the objective of this study is to compare the cost effectiveness of microscopy with two new tools: Loopamp™ Leishmania Detection Kit (LAMP) and CL Detect™ Rapid Test (RDT).
methodsData related to the cost and accuracy of these tools were collected at the clinic of the National Malaria and Leishmaniasis Control Program in Kabul, Afghanistan. The effectiveness estimates were measured based on the tools' performance but also indirectly, using the disability-adjusted life years. A decision tree was designed in TreeAge Healthcare Pro 2016, combined with a Markov model representing the natural history of cutaneous leishmaniasis. In addition to a deterministic analysis, univariate sensitivity and probabilistic analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results.
resultsIf the tools are compared at the National Malaria and Leishmaniasis Control Program level in a period of low incidence, microscopy remains the preferred option. LAMP becomes more appropriate during cutaneous leishmaniasis seasons or outbreaks when its capacity to process several tests (e.g. up to 48) at a time can be maximised. RDT has a cost similar to microscopy when used at the reference clinic but as it is relatively easy to use, it could be implemented at the peripheral level, which would become cheaper than employing microscopy at the reference clinic. Moreover, combining RDT with microscopy or LAMP at the reference clinic for the negative suspects is economically more interesting than directly performing LAMP or microscopy respectively on all cutaneous leishmaniasis suspects at the reference clinic.
conclusionsWhen taking advantage of their respective strengths, LAMP and RDT can prove to be cost-effective alternatives to using microscopy alone at the reference clinic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.