Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39137206›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Cost-utility analysis of primary HPV testing through home-based self-sampling in comparison to visual inspection using acetic acid for cervical cancer screening in East district, Sikkim, India, 2023.

Roopa Hariprasad, Bhavani Shankara Bagepally, Sajith Kumar, Sangeeta Pradhan, Deepsikka Gurung, Harki Tamang, Arpana Sharma, Tarun Bhatnagar

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Human papillomavirus infection and screening strategies.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Roopa HariprasadSchool of Public Health, Indian Council Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.ORCID 0000-0003-2032-3432
Bhavani Shankara BagepallyHealth Technology Assessment Resource Centre, Indian Council Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.ORCID 0000-0003-0856-767X
Sajith KumarHealth Technology Assessment Resource Centre, Indian Council Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.ORCID 0000-0001-7938-9255
Sangeeta PradhanDepartment of Health and Welfare, Government of Sikkim, Gangtok, Sikkim, India.
Deepsikka GurungDepartment of Health and Welfare, Government of Sikkim, Gangtok, Sikkim, India.ORCID 0009-0001-4652-9546
Harki TamangDepartment of Health and Welfare, Government of Sikkim, Gangtok, Sikkim, India.
Arpana SharmaJhpiego - an affiliate of Johns Hopkins University, Gangtok, Sikkim, India.
Tarun BhatnagarSchool of Public Health, Indian Council Medical Research-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.ORCID 0000-0002-5603-1418

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPrimary Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) testing offers higher sensitivity and specificity over Visual Inspection using Acetic acid (VIA) in cervical cancer screening. Self-sampling is a promising strategy to boost participation and reduce disparities. However, concerns about the initial costs hinder HPV testing adoption in low and middle-income countries. This study assesses the cost-utility of home-based HPV self-sampling versus VIA for cervical cancer screening in India.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in East district, Sikkim, India, comparing the costs and utility outcomes of population-based cervical cancer screening through VIA and primary HPV screening through self-sampling. Cost-related data were collected from April 2021 to March 2022 using the bottom-up micro-costing method, while utility measures were collected prospectively using the EuroQoL-5D-5L questionnaire. The utility values were converted into quality-adjusted life days (QALDs) for an 8-day period. The willingness to pay threshold (WTP) was based on per capita GDP for 2022. If the calculated Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) value is lower than the WTP threshold, it signifies that the intervention is cost-effective.

resultsThe study included 95 women in each group of cervical cancer screening with VIA & HPV self-sampling. For eight days, the QALD was found to be 7.977 for the VIA group and 8.0 for the HPV group. The unit cost per woman screened by VIA and HPV self-testing was ₹1,597 (US$ 19.2) and ₹1,271(US$ 15.3), respectively. The ICER was ₹-14,459 (US$ -173.6), which was much below the WTP threshold for eight QALDs, i.e. ₹ 4,193 (US$ 50.4).

conclusionThe findings support HPV self-sampling as a cost-effective alternative to VIA. This informs policymakers and healthcare providers for better resource allocation in cervical cancer screening in Sikkim.

Indexed as

Acetic AcidCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansIndiaMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsSelf CareSelf-TestingSpecimen HandlingAcetic Acid

Identifiers

PMID39137206
PMCPMC11321578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.