Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30485377›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Healthcare value of implementing hepatitis C screening in the adult general population in Spain.

María Buti, Raquel Domínguez-Hernández, Miguel Ángel Casado, Eliazar Sabater, Rafael Esteban

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

NCT04037046 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Acceptance and Viability of Three Strategies in Birth Cohort Hepatitis C Screening

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of La LagunaRan2019 to 2019Enrolled609ConditionsHepatitis C Virus InfectionArmsScreening HCV attached onto CCR screening, Screening HCV attached onto CCR screening by self-testing, Screening HCV at primary care center
NCT05146609 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Acceptance of Hepatitis C Screening by Self-testing in High Risk and General Population

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of La LagunaRan2022 to 2024Enrolled1,384ConditionsHepatitis CArmsScreening HCV. HR-HOSPITAL, Screening HCV. HR-DDP, Screening HCV. GP-HOSPITAL, Screening HCV. GP-PCC
NCT05756738 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Acceptance and Feasibility of Hepatitis c Screening Strategies in Social Insertion Centers With Alternative Sentences to Prison and Open System

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of La LagunaRan2023 to 2024Enrolled854ConditionsHepatitis C VirusArmsDried blood spot testing
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Is the universal population Hepatitis C virus screening a cost-effective strategy? A systematic review of the economic evidence.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Hepatitis C Screening: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Disease burden and economic impact of diagnosed non-alcoholic steatohepatitis in five European countries in 2018: A cost-of-illness analysis.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

María ButiHospital General Universitario Vall d'Hebron, CIBERehd, Barcelona, Spain.
Raquel Domínguez-HernándezPharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-1083-7288
Miguel Ángel CasadoPharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia, Madrid, Spain.
Eliazar SabaterPharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia, Madrid, Spain.
Rafael EstebanHospital General Universitario Vall d'Hebron, CIBERehd, Barcelona, Spain.
Pharmacoeconomics and Health Outcomes Research Iberia (Spain) · ESVall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElimination of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection requires high diagnostic rates and universal access to treatment. Around 40% of infected individuals are unaware of their infection, which indicates that effective screening strategies are needed. We analyzed the efficiency (incremental cost-utility ratio, ICUR) of 3 HCV screening strategies: a) general population of adults, b) high-risk groups, and c) population with the highest anti-HCV prevalence plus high-risk groups.

methodsAn analytical decision model, projecting progression of the disease over a lifetime, was used to establish the candidate population for HCV screening. HCV data were obtained from the literature: anti-HCV prevalence (0.56%-1.54%), viremic patients (31.5%), and percentage of undiagnosed persons among those with viremia (35%). It was assumed that most patients would be treated and have HCV therapy response (98% SVR); transition probabilities, utilities, and disease management annual costs were obtained from the literature. Efficiency over the life of patients under the National Health System perspective was measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and total cost (screening, diagnosis, pharmacological and disease management). A discount rate of 3% was applied to costs and outcomes.

resultsScreening of the adult population would identify a larger number of additional chronic hepatitis C cases (N = 52,694) than screening the highest anti-HCV prevalence population plus high-risk groups (N = 42,027) or screening high-risk groups (N = 26,128). ICUR for the general population vs. high-risk groups was €8914/QALY gained per patient (€18,157 incremental cost and 2.037 QALY). ICUR for the general population vs. population with highest anti-HCV prevalence plus high-risk groups was €7,448/QALY gained per patient (€7,733 incremental cost and 1.038 QALY). These ICUR values are below the accepted efficiency threshold (€22,000-€30,000).

conclusionHCV screening and treatment of the general adult population is cost-effective compared to screening of high-risk groups or the population with the highest anti-HCV prevalence plus high-risk groups.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision Support TechniquesDecision TreesHealth Care CostsHepacivirusHepatitis CHumansMarkov ChainsMass ScreeningMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsRiskSpainYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30485377
PMCPMC6261617
OpenAlexW2903216643

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.