ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2020
Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Benefit of Cervical Cancer Screening with Liquid Based Cytology Compared with Conventional Cytology in Germany.
Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of economic evaluations of triage tests for women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL).International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Pooled it
- Health economic evaluation of health promotion and disease prevention in Germany: a scoping review.Health economics review · 2026Review
- Impact of gender and education on cervical cancer knowledge amongst students: implications for health policies and public health strategies in Wiesbaden, Germany.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2024Article
- Article
- Cervical Cancer Prophylaxis-State-of-the-Art and Perspectives.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Investigation of the Clinical Application Value of HR-HPV DNA Combined with Liquid Based Cytology in Colposcopy of Cervical Cancer.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Quality and Performance of Papanicolaou Test using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) EP12-A2 Guidelines: A Single-Center Study in Peru.Journal of cytologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the health economic impact of cervical screening with liquid based cytology (LBC) compared with conventional cytology (CC) in Germany.
methodsAn economic model was constructed depicting the management of a hypothetical cohort of women aged ≥20 years who undergo cervical screening in Germany. The model estimated the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of LBC compared with CC at 2017/18 prices over a time-horizon of 70 years.
resultsPerforming cervical screens with LBC instead of CC is expected to increase the probability of detecting a true positive over a subject's lifetime by 73% (0.038 versus 0.022) and of diagnosing a subject with stage 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN3) (0.019 versus 0.011). Women screened with LBC instead of CC are expected to have a 57% reduction in the probability of having undetected CIN3 (0.006 versus 0.014) and to experience a 44% reduction in the probability of transitioning into disease progression (from 0.018 to 0.010). The mean discounted lifetime cost of healthcare resource use associated with performing cervical screens with LBC and CC was estimated at €4852 and €7523 per subject respectively. For every Euro invested in cervical screening with LBC instead of CC, the German healthcare system could potentially save ~€170 over a subject's lifetime.
conclusionWithin the study's limitations, the analysis showed that LBC affords a cost-effective cervical screening test compared with CC in Germany, since it improves detection rates and has the potential to lead to a reduction in disease progression for less cost.
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.