ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2020
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Four Common Diagnostic Methods for Clostridioides difficile Infection.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gastroenterological Surgery and Management ofJournal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2025Review
- Treated, hospital-onsetInfection control and hospital epidemiology · 2024Article
- Budget Impact Analysis of Adopting a One-Step Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing (NAAT) Alone Diagnostic Pathway forDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Efficiency of Diagnostic Testing forAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- A passive monitoring tool using hospital administrative data enables earlier specific detection of healthcare-acquired infections.The Journal of hospital infection · 2020Article
- Early Economic Modeling to Inform a Target Product Profile: A Case Study of a Novel Rapid Test forMDM policy & practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNo studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of single and two-step different diagnostic test strategies for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), including direct and indirect costs.
objectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of commonly available diagnostic tests for CDI including nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) alone, glutamate dehydrogenase followed by enzyme immunoassay for toxin (GDH/EIA), GDH then NAAT (GDH/NAAT), and NAAT then EIA (NAAT/EIA).
designDecision tree model from the US societal perspective with inputs derived from the literature. Willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $150,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. To assess the impact of uncertainty in model inputs on the findings, we performed one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
participantsWe conducted the analysis to represent a population aged 65 years old with diarrhea who received a CDI diagnostic test. MAIN MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and incremental net monetary benefits (INMB). KEY
resultsNAAT alone was the most cost-effective approach overall; GDH/NAAT was the most cost-effective two-step option. NAAT alone led to the highest QALYs gained, at an incremental cost of $54,547 (vs. GDH/NAAT), $55,410 (vs. GDH/EIA), and $50,231 (vs. NAAT/EIA) per QALY gained. NAAT/EIA was not cost-effective compared to any other strategy. GDH/NAAT resulted in a higher QALY compared to GDH/EIA, at an incremental cost of $96,841 per QALY gained. Variability in the likelihood of comorbidities, CDI probability, and age at disease onset did not substantially change the results. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that results were most sensitive to likelihood of recurrence, followed by CDI mortality rate and probability of severe CDI. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses explored known uncertainties in the base case and confirmed the robustness of the results.
conclusionsNAAT alone and GDH/NAAT (among the two-step options) were the most cost-effective diagnostic test approaches for CDI.
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.