Health economic evaluations of diagnostic tests for tuberculosis: a narrative review

Cemre Arpa, Ahmed Abd El Wahed, Serap Aydin, Prakash Ghosh, Dinesh Mondal, Lydia Nakiyingi, Julius Boniface Okuni, Sophie Schneitler, Manfred Weidmann and Martin Siegel ()
Additional contact information
Cemre Arpa: Technische Universität Berlin
Ahmed Abd El Wahed: Leipzig University
Serap Aydin: Technische Universität Berlin
Prakash Ghosh: Technische Universität Berlin
Dinesh Mondal: International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research Bangladesh (icddr,b)
Lydia Nakiyingi: Makerere University College of Health Sciences
Julius Boniface Okuni: Makerere University
Sophie Schneitler: University Clinic Saarland
Manfred Weidmann: Midge Medical GmbH
Martin Siegel: Technische Universität Berlin

Health Economics Review, 2025, vol. 15, issue 1, 1-12

Abstract: Abstract Background Tuberculosis is the leading cause of death from infectious diseases globally. Non-specific symptoms and limitations of existing diagnostics involve challenges for informed policymaking and clinical practice. This paper reviews common practices in reporting the selection and definition of cost and effect parameters, and in reporting the translation of effect parameters into utility and disability weights, in health economic evaluations of TB diagnostic tests. Methods A targeted literature search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar identified health economic evaluations of diagnosis and population screening strategies for TB. Results We found 28 studies comprising 11 cost-effectiveness and 17 cost-utility analyses. Observed patient data were used in 6 studies, 22 relied solely on model-based evaluations. Variations in prevalence, accuracy, and utility parameters were common, the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards terminology for costing was only used in 8 out of 28 studies. Discussion Future studies should state the exact type of TB studied, as it can manifest in multiple organs, remain inactive for long periods of time, and since different diagnostics can perform differently depending on the site involved it may influence test accuracies. Additionally, potential impacts of sequential diagnostics on test accuracy and the cost of inaction should receive more attention. Conclusion Precise terminology and transparent definitions of parameters and methodology in health economics evaluations are necessary to generate evidence that guides policymakers and supports clinical decision-making in the context of TB.

Keywords: Tuberculosis; Diagnostics; Health economics; Evaluation; Reporting; Guidelines; Transparency (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s13561-025-00639-2 Abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:15:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-025-00639-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/13561

DOI: 10.1186/s13561-025-00639-2

Access Statistics for this article

Health Economics Review is currently edited by J. Matthias Graf von der Schulenburg

More articles in Health Economics Review from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().