ArticleFrontiers in public health2023
Cost-effectiveness analysis of different screening and diagnostic strategies for sexually transmitted infections and bacterial vaginosis in women attending primary health care facilities in Cape Town.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors influencing implementation of point-of-care tests for maternal and newborn screening and diagnosis in low-resource settings: a systematic review.BMC global and public health · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of bacterial vaginosis screening strategies in women attempting for natural conception.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Leveraging current capacity to address the high prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Trichomonas vaginalis in South Africa: Modelling potential costs and benefits of near point-of-care GeneXpert testing for STIs.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Genital inflammation associated with sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and bacterial vaginosis (BV) is considered a key driver in the HIV epidemic. A new rapid point-of-care test (POC) that detects genital inflammation in women-Genital InFlammation Test (GIFT)-was recently developed by researchers at the University of Cape Town. The objective of this study was to establish the cost-effectiveness of this novel intervention relative to other relevant screening and diagnostic strategies for the management of STIs and BV in women seeking care in the public health sector in South Africa. Methods: A decision analysis model was developed for five different screening and diagnostic strategies for women incorporating syndromic management, screening with GIFT and using etiological diagnosis. A decision tree was constructed using Microsoft Excel Office 365, and cost and effectiveness parameters were obtained from published literature and market prices. The model incorporated all clinic-level and treatment costs associated with diagnosing and treating a single episode of disease. The effectiveness of each approach was proxied by its sensitivity. One-way and threshold sensitivity analyses were conducted to test key uncertainties and assumptions in the model. Results: Screening with GIFT, and following with antibiotic treatment according to syndromic management guidelines for GIFT-positive cases, was the most cost-effective strategy with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD 11.08 per women diagnosed with an STI(s) and/or BV and provided treatment. This strategy resulted in lower rates of overtreatment compared to syndromic management, but higher rates compared to etiological diagnosis using nucleic acid amplification tests and microscopy. However, following a GIFT positive test with etiological diagnosis prior to treatment did not increase the effectiveness, but dramatically increased the cost. Conclusion: Screening with GIFT and treating positive cases according to syndromic management guidelines is the most cost-effective strategy for the management of STIs and BV. GIFT has a potential to significantly improve the management of STIs and BV in women by identifying asymptomatic women and reducing their risk of HIV infection. This analysis presents a first step in establishing the cost-effectiveness of these interventions and paves the way for further research to develop optimal context-specific implementation strategies.
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.