ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2021
Cost Evaluation of Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling (MITS) Implementation in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.
Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic accuracy of a simplified minimally invasive tissue sampling protocol for stillbirths in low-resource settings.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Minimally invasive autopsies for the investigation of pulmonary pathology of COVID-19-experiences of a longitudinal series of 92 patients.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2023Article
- Determination of causes of adult deaths using minimally invasive tissue sampling in Gandaki province of Nepal: a multicenter hospital-based study.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling Surveillance Alliance-Facilitating the Expansion of Pathology-Based Mortality Surveillance.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLow- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face disproportionately high mortality rates, yet the causes of death in LMICs are not robustly understood, limiting the effectiveness of interventions to reduce mortality. Minimally invasive tissue sampling (MITS) is a standardized postmortem examination method that holds promise for use in LMICs, where other approaches for determining cause of death are too costly or unacceptable. This study documents the costs associated with implementing the MITS procedure in LMICs from the healthcare provider perspective and aims to inform resource allocation decisions by public health decisionmakers.
methodsWe surveyed 4 sites in LMICs across Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia with experience conducting MITS. Using a bottom-up costing approach, we collected direct costs of resources (labor and materials) to conduct MITS and the pre-implementation costs required to initiate MITS.
resultsInitial investments range widely yet represent a substantial cost to implement MITS and are determined by the existing infrastructure and needs of a site. The costs to conduct a single case range between $609 and $1028 per case and are driven by labor, sample testing, and MITS supplies costs.
conclusionsVariation in each site's use of staff roles and testing protocols suggests sites conducting MITS may adapt use of resources based on available expertise, equipment, and surveillance objectives. This study is a first step toward necessary examinations of cost-effectiveness, which may provide insight into cost optimization and economic justification for the expansion of MITS.
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.