ArticleHealth economics review2026
Cost-effectiveness of AI-enhanced breast cancer screening in Iran: a microsimulation study.
Article in Health economics review, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecognized worldwide as a major health threat and Sustainable Development Goal priority, breast cancer places an especially heavy clinical and economic burden on Iran, making early detection imperative. To guide policy, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of ten mammography-based screening schedules.
methodsWe developed an individual-level microsimulation model simulating 10,000 Iranian women over a 40-year horizon. Screening scenarios varied by interval (annual, biennial, triennial), incorporating mammography alone and two AI-enhanced strategies. Analyses adopted a payer perspective, discounting costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at 5% annually. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were evaluated against a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of USD 4,500 per QALY (Iran's 2023 GDP per capita). Probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) assessment ensured result robustness.
resultsCompared with no screening, all screening schedules increased QALYs and total costs, while reducing breast-cancer incidence and mortality. Among the alternative tests, annual mammography interpreted by AI and a radiologist was the most cost-effective strategy, with an ICER of USD 4,064 per QALY, demonstrating a high level of cost-effectiveness relative to the next most effective strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed robustness, with the selected strategy being cost-effective in 52% of simulations.
conclusionsAI-enhanced mammography is more cost-effective than conventional screening. Concurrent AI-radiologist double reading delivers the greatest value at Iran's USD 4,500 /QALY threshold, while AI-triage with radiologist confirmation, though less efficient, offers a practical alternative in settings where imaging and biopsy capacity cannot be rapidly expanded.
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.