ArticleBMC health services research2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of tandem mass spectrometry compared to fluorescence analysis for screening neonatal genetic metabolic diseases.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveTo compare the cost-effectiveness of tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) screening for neonatal inherited metabolic diseases (IMDs) with fluorescence analysis (FA) screening for neonatal inherited metabolic diseases (IMDs) and provide evidence for promoting MS/MS in China.
methodsAn Excel-based decision tree model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MS/MS versus FA screening from a societal perspective. The model simulated the screening pathway, prevention, and treatment of IMDs, adjusted to 2023 price levels. Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with a 3% annual discount rate applied. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at one times the per-capita GDP of China in 2023.
resultsMS/MS screening was more costly (CNY 1,121,637; USD 158,423 vs. CNY 380,276; USD 53,711) but more effective (16.47 QALYs vs. 5.93 QALYs) than FA screening. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was CNY 70,286 (USD 9,927) per QALY, below the WTP threshold. The benefit-cost ratio (BCR) was 1:3.94.
conclusionWhile MS/MS screening incurs higher costs, it achieves significantly greater QALY gains and demonstrates favorable cost-effectiveness and economic benefits. MS/MS screening should be actively promoted for neonatal IMDs in China.
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.