Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31260467›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Cost implications of HIV retesting for verification in Africa.

Arielle Lasry, Mireille B Kalou, Paul R Young, Jacqueline Rurangirwa, Bharat Parekh, Stephanie Behel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Arielle LasryDivision of Global HIV & TB, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0981-8557
Mireille B KalouDivision of Global HIV & TB, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Paul R YoungDivision of Global HIV & TB, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5564-9486
Jacqueline RurangirwaDivision of Global HIV & TB, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Bharat ParekhDivision of Global HIV & TB, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Stephanie BehelDivision of Global HIV & TB, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.

Funding

PEPFAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHIV misdiagnosis leads to severe individual and public health consequences. Retesting for verification of all HIV-positive cases prior to antiretroviral therapy initiation can reduce HIV misdiagnosis, yet this practice has not been not widely implemented.

methodsWe evaluated and compared the cost of retesting for verification of HIV seropositivity (retesting) to the cost of antiretroviral treatment (ART) for misdiagnosed cases in the absence of retesting (no retesting), from the perspective of the health care system. We estimated the number of misdiagnosed cases based on a review of misdiagnosis rates, and the number of positives persons needing ART initiation by 2020. We presented the total and per person costs of retesting as compared to no retesting, over a ten-year horizon, across 50 countries in Africa grouped by income level. We conducted univariate sensitivity analysis on all model input parameters, and threshold analysis to evaluate the parameter values where the total costs of retesting and the costs no retesting are equivalent. Cost data were adjusted to 2017 United States Dollars. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The estimated number of misdiagnoses, in the absence of retesting was 156,117, 52,720 and 29,884 for lower-income countries (LICs), lower-middle income countries (LMICs), and upper middle-income countries (UMICs), respectively, totaling 240,463 for Africa. Under the retesting scenario, costs per person initially diagnosed were: $40, $21, and $42, for LICs, LMICs, and UMICs, respectively. When retesting for verification is implemented, the savings in unnecessary ART were $125, $43, and $75 per person initially diagnosed, for LICs, LMICs, and UMICs, respectively. Over the ten-year horizon, the total costs under the retesting scenario, over all country income levels, was $475 million, and was $1.192 billion under the no retesting scenario, representing total estimated savings of $717 million in HIV treatment costs averted.

conclusionsResults show that to reduce HIV misdiagnosis, countries in Africa should implement the WHO's recommendation of retesting for verification prior to ART initiation, as part of a comprehensive quality assurance program for HIV testing services.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAfricaAIDS SerodiagnosisAnti-HIV AgentsAntiretroviral Therapy, Highly ActiveDeveloping CountriesDiagnostic ErrorsFemaleHealth Care CostsHIV InfectionsHumansIncomeMaleAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

PMID31260467
PMCPMC6602186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.