SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2021
Tuberculosis screening costs and cost-effectiveness in high-risk groups: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Rethinking Tuberculosis Morbidity Quantification: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of TB Disability Weights in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of active tuberculosis screening among high-risk populations in low tuberculosis incidence countries: a systematic review, 2008 to 2023.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2024Pooled it
- Number needed to screen for TB in clinical, structural or occupational risk groups.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2022Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of integrating paediatric tuberculosis services into child healthcare services in Africa: a modelling analysis of a cluster-randomised trial.BMJ global health · 2024Trial
- Evaluating systematic targeted universal testing for tuberculosis in primary care clinics of South Africa: A cluster-randomized trial (The TUTT Trial).PLoS medicine · 2023Trial
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of community tuberculosis screening in South Africa.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2026Article
- Tuberculosis Development in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Article
- Optimizing Quality of Care for Elderly Tuberculosis Patients in Shanghai, China: Insights from Patient Cascade of Care and Patient Pathway Analysis.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026Article
- Tuberculosis Stewardship: Reducing Diagnostic Delay Across the Clinical Spectrum in Low-Incidence Settings.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Routine active case finding in Nigerian penitentiary institutions: comparing yields from digital X-ray with CAD4TB and WHO 4-symptom screening.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of computer aided detection for tuberculosis in Ghana: A decision-analytic modeling study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Tuberculosis in prisons: an integrated prevention and care cascade for a persistent structural epidemic.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Comparative cost analysis of community-based tuberculosis screening: Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) alone versus CAD with point-of-care C-reactive protein testing in South Africa and Lesotho.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- The health impact of identifying a person with tuberculosis through systematic screening.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2025Review
- Rapid tuberculosis diagnosis from respiratory or blood samples by a low cost, portable lab-in-tube assay.Science translational medicine · 2025Article
- What Is the Optimal Community-Based Tuberculosis Screening Algorithm for People Who Inject Drugs in a High-Burden Setting?Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of screening and diagnostic tests used in a state-wide tuberculosis prevalence survey in India.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Risk factors for latent tuberculosis infection clustering among the elderly: a population-based cross-sectional study in Eastern China.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Intention to use mobile phone-based TB screening among HIV patients in Debre Tabor Town public health facilities, Northwest Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSystematic screening for active tuberculosis (TB) is a strategy which requires the health system to seek out individuals, rather than waiting for individuals to self-present with symptoms (i.e., passive case finding). Our review aimed to summarize the current economic evidence and understand the costs and cost-effectiveness of systematic screening approaches among high-risk groups and settings.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review on economic evaluations of screening for TB disease targeting persons with clinical and/or structural risk factors, such as persons living with HIV (PLHIV) or persons experiencing homelessness. We searched three databases for studies published between January 1, 2010 and February 1, 2020. Studies were included if they reported cost and a key outcome measure. Owing to considerable heterogeneity in settings and type of screening strategy, we synthesized data descriptively.
resultsA total of 27 articles were included in our review; 19/27 (70%) took place in high TB burden countries. Seventeen studies took place among persons with clinical risk factors, including 14 among PLHIV, while 13 studies were among persons with structural risk factors. Nine studies reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranging from US$51 to $1980 per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. Screening was most cost-effective among PLHIV. Among persons with clinical and structural risk factors there was limited evidence, but screening was generally not shown to be cost-effective.
conclusionsStudies showed that screening is most likely to be cost-effective in a high TB prevalence population. Our review highlights that to reach the "missing millions" TB programmes should focus on simple, cheaper initial screening tools (i.e., symptom screen and CXR) followed by molecular diagnostic tools (i.e., Xpert®) among the highest risk groups in the local setting (i.e., PLHIV, urban slums). Programmatic costs greatly impact cost-effectiveness thus future research should provide both fixed and variable costs of screening interventions to improve comparability.
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.