ArticleInternational journal of neonatal screening2022
Economic Evaluation of Newborn Screening for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency.
Article in International journal of neonatal screening, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Five-year experience of a combined newborn screening for spinal muscular atrophy and severe combined immunodeficiency in Liguria, Italy.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Article
- Data-Related and Methodological Challenges in Assessing the Cost-Effectiveness of Traditional and Genomic Newborn Screening Programs.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Review
- The Path to Screening US Newborns for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency, 1968-2018: A Narrative Review of a Successful Biomedical Research and Public Health Partnership.Public health genomics · 2026Review
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of newborn screening for severe combined immunodeficiency: a systematic review.Clinical and experimental pediatrics · 2025Article
- The clinical and socioeconomic aspects of t-cell receptor excision circle based newborn screening for severe combined immunodeficiency in Southeast and East Asia.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- First pilot study for newborn screening of severe T and B lymphopenias in ColombiaBiomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud · 2024Article
- Article
- Current Status of Newborn Bloodspot Screening Worldwide 2024: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Activities (2020-2023).International journal of neonatal screening · 2024Review
- Modelling the Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact of a Newborn Screening Program for Spinal Muscular Atrophy and Severe Combined Immunodeficiency.International journal of neonatal screening · 2022Article
- Valuing infertility treatment: Why QALYs are inadequate, and an alternative approach to cost-effectiveness thresholds.Frontiers in medical technology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Evidence on the cost-effectiveness of newborn screening (NBS) for severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) in the Australian policy context is lacking. In this study, a pilot population-based screening program in Australia was used to model the cost-effectiveness of NBS for SCID from the government perspective. Markov cohort simulations were nested within a decision analytic model to compare the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a time horizon of 5 and 60 years for two strategies: (1) NBS for SCID and treat with early hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT); (2) no NBS for SCID and treat with late HSCT. Incremental costs were compared to incremental QALYs to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the model uncertainty and identify key parameters impacting on the ICER. In the long-term over 60 years, universal NBS for SCID would gain 10 QALYs at a cost of US $0.3 million, resulting in an ICER of US$33,600/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that more than half of the simulated ICERs were considered cost-effective against the common willingness-to-pay threshold of A$50,000/QALY (US$35,000/QALY). In the Australian context, screening for SCID should be introduced into the current NBS program from both clinical and economic perspectives.
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.