Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32880650›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2020

Cost-effectiveness of Universal and Targeted Hepatitis C Virus Screening in the United States.

Moosa Tatar, Susana W Keeshin, Mark Mailliard, Fernando A Wilson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Hepatitis C Screening: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. A Review of Hepatitis B Virus and Hepatitis C Virus Immunopathogenesis.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2021
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Moosa TatarMatheson Center for Health Care Studies, the University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Susana W KeeshinDivision of Infectious Disease, the University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City.
Mark MailliardUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center College of Medicine, Omaha.
Fernando A WilsonMatheson Center for Health Care Studies, the University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
University of Utah · USUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Between 2 and 3.5 million people live with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the US, most of whom (approximately 75%) are not aware of their disease. Despite the availability of effective HCV treatment in the early stages of infection, HCV will result in thousands of deaths in the next decade in the US. Objective: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of universal screening for all US adults aged 18 years or older for HCV in the US and of targeted screening of people who inject drugs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This simulated economic evaluation used cohort analyses in a Markov model to perform a 10 000-participant Monte Carlo microsimulation trail to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of HCV screening programs, and compared screening programs targeting people who inject drugs with universal screening of US adults age 18 years or older. Data were analyzed in December 2019. Exposures: Cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Main Outcomes and Measures: Cost per QALY gained. Results: In a 10 000 Monte Carlo microsimulation trail that compared a baseline of individuals aged 40 years (men and women) and people who inject drugs in the US, screening and treatment for HCV were estimated to increase total costs by $10 457 per person and increase QALYs by 0.23 (approximately 3 months), providing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $45 465 per QALY. Also, universal screening and treatment for HCV are estimated to increase total costs by $2845 per person and increase QALYs by 0.01, providing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $291 277 per QALY. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that HCV screening for people who inject drugs may be a cost-effective intervention to combat HCV infection in the US, which could potentially decrease the risk of untreated HCV infection and liver-related mortality.

Indexed as

Hepatitis C, ChronicMass ScreeningSubstance Abuse, IntravenousAdultCohort StudiesCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHealth Care CostsHepacivirusHumansMaleMarkov ChainsMonte Carlo MethodPreventive Health ServicesQuality-Adjusted Life YearsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID32880650
PMCPMC7489814
OpenAlexW3081630412

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.