ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Provider costs of professional COVID-19 rapid antigen testing in low-income settings.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
World Health Organization recommends antigen rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) as point of care tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in suspected outbreaks when polymerase-chain-reaction testing is not accessible; to trace the extent of outbreaks; and in areas with widespread community transmission. Annual economic costs were estimated for professional SARS-CoV-2 testing as part of several COVID-19 testing use cases in Malawi, Nigeria and Zimbabwe. Symptom screening and antigen-based RDT was implemented as part of a multi-country, Unitaid/STAR 3ACP (Africa, Asia, America COVID-19 Prevention) funded project (April 2022-June 2023). Testing services were provided through trained health providers in outpatient departments of primary care facilities (Malawi and Nigeria) and two primary non governmental organisation (NGO) use cases separately targeting key population (KP) and the general population in Zimbabwe. Combined financial expenditure analysis and on-site micro-costing took the provider/health system perspective in 2025 US$. Per test average costs were $9.73 (range across sites: $5.49-$29.90) in Malawi, $13.99 ($11.64-US$18) in Nigeria and $10.11 ($4.19-$209.09) and $19.98 ($10.76-$56.40) in Zimbabwe for general population and key population clinics respectively. Average costs per positive case identified were $521 ($61-$800) in Malawi; $1,118 ($202.66-$4,804.45) in Nigeria; and $1,125 ($336-$ 1,762) and $187 ($161-$ 1,272) in Zimbabwe. Major cost contributors were test kits in Malawi, test kits and building (consultation room space costs) and storage in Nigeria and personnel and training in Zimbabwe. Excluding above site level costs, the average cost per SARS-CoV-2 test was $9.73 in Malawi, $13.99 in Nigeria and $10.70 and $9.79 in Zimbabwe. Integrating COVID-19 testing into existing sites can reach people at high risk of severe illness at a reasonable cost. For resource-limited settings where programmes are threatened by low fiscal space, costs might be reduced when scaling up, through greater spreading of startup and capital costs.
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.