Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33413386›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Economic evaluation of alternative testing regimes and settings to detect undiagnosed HIV in Australia.

Owain D Williams, Judith A Dean, Anna Crothers, Charles F Gilks, Jeff Gow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Owain D WilliamsSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston, Australia.
Judith A DeanSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston, Australia.
Anna CrothersSchool of Medicine, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia.
Charles F GilksSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston, Australia.
Jeff GowSchool of Commerce, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland, 4350, Australia. gowj@usq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5726-298X

Funding

HIV Foundation Queensland This study was supported by a HIV Foundation Queensland Research and Program Grant.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe study aimed to estimate the comparative costs per positive diagnosis of previously undetected HIV in three testing regimes: conventional; parallel and point of care (POC) testing. The regimes are analysed in six testing settings in Australia where infection is concentrated but with low prevalence.

methodsA cost model was developed to highlight the trade-offs between test and economic efficiency from a provider perspective. First, an estimate of the number of tests needed to find a true (previously undiagnosed) positive diagnosis was made. Second, estimates of the average cost per positive diagnosis in whole of population (WoP) and men who have sex with men (MSM) was made, then third, aggregated to the total cost for diagnosis of all undetected infections.

resultsParallel testing is as effective as conventional testing, but more economically efficient. POC testing provide two significant advantages over conventional testing: they screen out negatives effectively at comparatively lower cost and, with confirmatory testing of reactive results, there is no loss in efficiency. The average and total costs per detection in WoP are prohibitive, except for Home Self Testing. The diagnosis in MSM is cost effective in all settings, but especially using Home Self Testing when the individual assumes the cost of testing.

conclusionsThis study illustrates the trade-offs between economic and test efficiency and their interactions with population(s) prevalence. The efficient testing regimes and settings are presently under or not funded in Australia. Home Self Testing has the potential to dramatically increase testing rates at very little cost.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsSexual and Gender MinoritiesAustraliaCost-Benefit AnalysisHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningConventional testingCostsHIV testingParallel testingPoint of care testingSelf-testing

Identifiers

PMID33413386
PMCPMC7789789

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.