ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Point-of-care Testing HbA1c screening for type 2 diabetes in urban and rural areas of China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Analyzing the impact of social security systems on video-based public health surveillance.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Point-of-care Testing (POCT) glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is a convenient, cheap, effective and accessible screening method for type 2 diabetes in rural areas and community settings that is widely used in the European region and Japan, but not yet widespread in China. The study is the first to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of POCT HbA1c, fasting capillary glucose (FCG), and venous blood HbA1c to screen for type 2 diabetes in urban and rural areas of China, and to identify the best socio-economically beneficial screening strategy. Methods: Based on urban and rural areas in China, economic models for type 2 diabetes screening were constructed from a social perspective. The subjects of this study were adults aged 18-80 years with undiagnosed type 2 diabetes. Three screening strategies were established for venous blood HbA1c, FCG and POCT HbA1c, and cost-effectiveness analysis was performed by Markov models. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed on all parameters of the model to verify the stability of the results. Results: Compared with FCG, POCT HbA1c was cost-effective with an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of $500.06/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in urban areas and an ICUR of $185.10/QALY in rural areas, within the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP = $37,653). POCT HbA1c was cost-effective with lower cost and higher utility compared with venous blood HbA1c in both urban and rural areas. In the comparison of venous blood HbA1c and FCG, venous blood HbA1c was cost-effective (ICUR = $20,833/QALY) in urban areas but not in rural areas (ICUR = $41,858/QALY). Sensitivity analyses showed that the results of the study were stable and credible. Conclusions: POCT HbA1c was cost-effective for type 2 diabetes screening in both urban and rural areas of China, which could be considered for future clinical practice in China. Factors such as geographic location, local financial situation and resident compliance needed to be considered when making the choice of venous blood HbA1c or FCG.
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.