ArticleIJTLD open2024
Unit costs and cost-effectiveness of a device to improve TB treatment adherence in China.
Article in IJTLD open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Digital Health Technologies in Tuberculosis Treatment: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Pooled it
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdherence to TB drugs is crucial for improving treatment outcomes. Digital adherence technologies can improve adherence; however, there is a lack of evidence on cost-effectiveness. This study aimed to explore the cost-effectiveness of medication event reminder monitors (MERM) in China compared with the standard of care, using results from a pragmatic, cluster-randomised superiority trial of an electronic MERM in China.
methodsWe collected primary unit cost data from the societal perspective, both at and above the health facility level. We estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness of MERM using a Markov model with a 20-year time horizon; a 3% discount rate was applied to costs and outcomes. We explored uncertainty through a series of sensitivity and scenario analyses.
resultsThe incremental cost of MERM was $27.22 per patient. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed significant uncertainty about the intervention's cost-effectiveness. Changing assumptions around key parameters substantially affected our estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.
conclusionsAlthough the incremental cost of the MERM box was low, current evidence does not indicate that the intervention would be cost-effective. However, the intervention's cost-effectiveness could improve if implemented as part of a broader strategy, including enhanced patient management.
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.