ArticlePloS one2021
Cost of whole genome sequencing for non-typhoidal Salmonella enterica.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of economic evaluations of whole-genome sequencing for the surveillance of bacterial pathogens.Microbial genomics · 2023Pooled it
- Importance of Global Genomic Data Sharing to Prevent Illnesses Linked to Commercially Distributed Foods.Food safety (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025Article
- The impact of integrated genomic surveillance on non-typhoidalThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Article
- Serovar-level identification of bacterial foodborne pathogens from full-length 16S rRNA gene sequencing.mSystems · 2024Article
- Development of a rapid diagnostic test based on loop-mediated isothermal amplification to identify the most frequent non-typhoidal Salmonella serovars from culture.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2023Article
- A Real-Time PCR Approach for Rapid Detection of ViableMicroorganisms · 2023Article
- Clinical Metagenomics Is Increasingly Accurate and Affordable to Detect Enteric Bacterial Pathogens in Stool.Microorganisms · 2022Article
- Discerning the Antimicrobial Resistance, Virulence, and Phylogenetic Relatedness ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
- An economic evaluation of the Whole Genome Sequencing source tracking program in the U.S.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile whole genome sequencing (WGS) may be more expensive than traditional testing and polymerase chain reaction (PCR), simple cost comparisons ignore the potential for WGS to reduce the societal costs of non-typhoidal Salmonella enterica through public health action to prevent illness.
methodsWe determined how many cases the use of WGS data would need to prevent to be cost-equal to serotyping and MLVA, or culture independent testing based on PCR in Australia. We then examined the costs and cost-savings of current typing methods compared with WGS in outbreak scenarios.
resultsA median of 275 (90% CrI -55-775) or 1.9% (90% CrI -0.4%-5.4%) of notified serotyped Salmonella cases would need to be prevented for WGS to be cost-equal to current typing methods and 1,550 (90% CrI 820-2,725) or 9.6% of all notified Salmonella cases would need to be prevented to be cost-equal to PCR. WGS is likely to result in cost savings in prolonged outbreaks, where data can support earlier public health action.
conclusionsDespite currently having a higher cost per isolate, routine WGS of Salmonella was no more expensive than existing typing methods or PCR where >2% of illness was averted.
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.