Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39931251›Full record

ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2025

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Genetic Testing as a Prenatal Diagnostic Tool for Thalassemia: A Single-Center Study From Central Thailand.

Kwandao Malasai, Jiraphun Jittikoon, Wanvisa Udomsinprasert, Pattarawalai Talungchit, Sitaporn Youngkong, Sermsiri Sangroongruangsri, Surakameth Mahasirimongkol, Usa Chaikledkaew

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
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.

Kwandao MalasaiSocial, Economic and Administrative Pharmacy (SEAP) Graduate Program, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Jiraphun JittikoonDepartment of Biochemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Wanvisa UdomsinprasertDepartment of Biochemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pattarawalai TalungchitDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-3668-8754
Sitaporn YoungkongMahidol University Health Technology Assessment (MUHTA) Graduate Program, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sermsiri SangroongruangsriSocial and Administrative Pharmacy Division, Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-5222-8694
Surakameth MahasirimongkolInformation and Communication Technology Center, Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Usa ChaikledkaewMahidol University Health Technology Assessment (MUHTA) Graduate Program, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the costs and benefits of genetic testing, specifically mutation analysis and prenatal diagnostic testing, for the confirmation of thalassemia in at-risk pregnancies in Thailand, providing crucial insights to inform public health policy decision-making. Patients and Methods: We analyzed the costs and benefits of following standard screening guidelines, which included a sequence of tests such as mean corpuscular volume (MCV)/mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH) with dichlorophenol indophenol precipitation (DCIP), hemoglobin (Hb) typing, genetic testing, and amniocentesis. A decision-tree model was employed for this analysis. The study compared the scenarios with and without genetic testing, adopting a societal perspective that accounted for costs during pregnancy and the lifetime of a child born with thalassemia. Both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to account for uncertainties in the parameters used. Results: The results revealed that adhering to the standard screening program with genetic testing resulted in a cost-savings of approximately 490 USD per prevented thalassemia case. Among the diagnostic methods, the specificity of the MCV/MCH with DCIP showed a higher degree of sensitivity relative to other testing methods, significantly influencing the outcomes. From a governmental perspective, with a full uptake of genetic testing, the incremental budget required was estimated to be 3.7 million USD (131 million THB) for one year. Conclusion: These findings are particularly valuable for policymakers, as they provide robust evidence supporting potential revisions to the reimbursement structure within Thailand's Universal Health Coverage benefit package, facilitating better management of thalassemia and improving prenatal care.

Indexed as

cost-benefit analysisgenetic testingpregnancyprenatal screeningthalassemia

Identifiers

PMID39931251
PMCPMC11808050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.