ArticlePloS one2026
Economic barriers to diagnostic equity: A multi-country analysis of patient costs for rapid SARS-CoV-2 testing in sub-Saharan Africa.
Article in PloS one, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic has passed, understanding the economic barriers to diagnostic access remains critical for future pandemic preparedness and universal health coverage. Implementing efficient testing modalities is crucial to achieving optimal value for both clients and healthcare providers. This study examines the cost and affordability of various SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid-diagnostic-test modalities in Nigeria, Malawi, and Zimbabwe from a client perspective, providing a blueprint for future diagnostic strategies in Sub-Saharan Africa. Testing was offered for free through professional testing and self-testing in government or NGO-led primary healthcare centers across all countries, and in community pharmacies and drug stores in Nigeria. Data were collected from October 2022 to May 2023 through a survey of a random sample of adults visiting participating sites. The survey collected patient costs, including transportation, medical and non-medical expenses, and productivity loss. Affordability was assessed by the incidence of catastrophic health expenditure (defined as costs exceeding 10% of household income). The unit patient cost of testing in Nigeria, Malawi and Zimbabwe was $4.2, $2.7 and $2.7, respectively. In Nigeria, testing in community pharmacies and drug stores was cheaper than in primary healthcare centers. Self-testing cost less than professional testing in Nigeria ($1.3 versus $9.8), but more in Zimbabwe ($3.2 versus $2.3). In Malawi, Nigeria and Zimbabwe 40.6%, 28.6%, and 5.7% of clients, respectively, faced catastrophic health expenditures. SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing imposes a significant financial burden on clients. Even "free" testing carries high indirect costs that threaten diagnostic equity. Diversified testing modalities, such as community pharmacies and drug stores, may offer lower-cost options for sustainable diagnostic integration.
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.