ArticlePloS one2026
Strengthening the National Sickle Cell Elimination Mission through universal access to point-of-care screening test.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe study aims to identify the most affordable point-of-care tests and their financial implications for the implementation of the universal screening of sickle cell disease in India.
methodThis study is a rapid health technology assessment from Indian public health system's perspective using decision tree model for a hypothetical tribal population cohort of 0-40 years in six endemic states. Point-of-care (POC) tests (Hemotype Sc, Sickle Scan, Sickle CERT and Gazelle) were compared with the existing standard of care (SOC) - solubility test with confirmation using high-performance liquid chromatography, for universal screening and early detection of sickle cell disease/traits. The health system cost per case screened and detected were estimated along with budget impact for implementing the screening programs.
resultsThe health system cost were higher for all the evaluated POC tests than SOC. The POC screening cost ranged from US$2.38 - US$3.85 per case and US$146.17 - US$230.73 per case detected, compared with US$0.67 and US$42.53 for SOC. However, POC test detected substantially more sickle cell disease cases, incrementally detecting 21,125-41,458 cases. Based on these findings, the National Health Mission directed states to publicly procure POC tests. The price negotiation resulting from the public tendering and competitive bidding resulted in-house manufacturing and validation of these kits lowering their prices substantially which enabled states procuring these POC tests at less than US$ 1.21 per test, potentially yielding US$37.86 million in savings with full coverage.
conclusionThe rapid HTA provided the state governments with evidence-based guidance to negotiate procurement prices for the POCs which facilitated efficient budget allocation to implement sickle cell screening strategy effectively.
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.