ArticleBMC public health2025
Optimizing tuberculosis infection screening strategies for people living with HIV in Thailand: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo support evidence-based decision-making in Thailand, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) compared to the Tuberculin Skin Test (TST) in people living with HIV (PLWH). The outcomes of this investigation are intended to provide valuable guidance for policymakers in Thailand and other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to choose the most appropriate screening tests to detect tuberculosis infection (TBI).
methodsWe evaluated QFT-Plus versus the TST using a decision-tree–Markov model under a healthcare payer perspective, expressed in 2022 US dollars. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were discounted at 3% per year. The model simulated one-time screening at baseline for a hypothetical cohort of adults living with HIV in Thailand (mean age 38 years), followed over a lifetime horizon to capture downstream costs and health effects of preventing active tuberculosis (TB). Inputs were drawn from Thai national sources, World Health Organization (WHO) guidance, and published literature. Outcomes were reported per individual screened and treated.
resultsQFT-Plus reduced lifetime risk of active TB by ~ 41% versus TST and yielded lower lifetime costs per individual screened and treated ($74.99 vs. $77.11). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness; QFT-Plus was cost-effective in 100% of simulations across willingness-to-pay thresholds.
conclusionsFor PLWH in Thailand, QFT-plus was cost-effective when compared to TST. These findings support prioritizing QFT-plus in national screening guidelines and resource allocation decisions in similar high-burden, resource-limited settings. Further prospective cohort studies should be conducted in similar settings to validate and generalize these results.
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.