ArticlePLOS digital health2025
Implementation costs and cost-effectiveness of ultraportable chest X-ray with artificial intelligence in active case finding for tuberculosis in Nigeria.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence-enabled pediatric radiology in low-resource settings: addressing resource constraints in the African healthcare system.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- Asymptomatic Tuberculosis: The Silent Face of the Disease Among Migrants and Refugees and the Challenges in Brazil.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Tuberculosis Screening and Detection: From Evidence to Policy and Implementation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Research overview-2025: integrating scientific progress to accelerate global tuberculosis elimination.Frontiers in tuberculosis · 2026Article
- Strategies for Tuberculosis Prevention in Healthcare Settings: A Narrative Review.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Availability of ultraportable chest x-ray (CXR) and advancements in artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled CXR interpretation are promising developments in tuberculosis (TB) active case finding (ACF) but costing and cost-effectiveness analyses are limited. We provide implementation cost and cost-effectiveness estimates of different screening algorithms using symptoms, CXR and AI in Nigeria. People 15 years and older were screened for TB symptoms and offered a CXR with AI-enabled interpretation using qXR v3 (Qure.ai) at lung health camps. Sputum samples were tested on Xpert MTB/RIF for individuals reporting symptoms or with qXR abnormality scores ≥0.30. We conducted a retrospective costing using a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches while utilizing itemized expense data from a health system perspective. We estimated costs in five screening scenarios: abnormality score ≥0.30 and ≥0.50; cough ≥ 2 weeks; any symptom; abnormality score ≥0.30 or any symptom. We calculated total implementation costs, cost per bacteriologically-confirmed case detected, and assessed cost-effectiveness using incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) as additional cost per additional case. Overall, 3205 people with presumptive TB were identified, 1021 were tested, and 85 people with bacteriologically-confirmed TB were detected. Abnormality ≥ 0.30 or any symptom (US$65704) had the highest costs while cough ≥ 2 weeks was the lowest (US$40740). The cost per case was US$1198 for cough ≥ 2 weeks, and lowest for any symptom (US$635). Compared to baseline strategy of cough ≥ 2 weeks, the ICER for any symptom was US$191 per additional case detected and US$ 2096 for Abnormality ≥0.30 OR any symptom algorithm. Using CXR and AI had lower cost per case detected than any symptom screening criteria when asymptomatic TB was higher than 30% of all bacteriologically-confirmed TB detected. Compared to traditional symptom screening, using CXR and AI in combination with symptoms detects more cases at lower cost per case detected and is cost-effective. TB programs should explore adoption of CXR and AI for screening in ACF.
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.