↓ Skip to main content

Tuberculosis active case finding in Cambodia: a pragmatic, cost-effectiveness comparison of three implementation models

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
154 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Tuberculosis active case finding in Cambodia: a pragmatic, cost-effectiveness comparison of three implementation models
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2670-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard James, Keovathanak Khim, Lydia Boudarene, Joanne Yoong, Chea Phalla, Saly Saint, Pichenda Koeut, Tan Eang Mao, Richard Coker, Mishal Sameer Khan

Abstract

Globally, almost 40% of tuberculosis (TB) patients remain undiagnosed, and those that are diagnosed often experience prolonged delays before initiating correct treatment, leading to ongoing transmission. While there is a push for active case finding (ACF) to improve early detection and treatment of TB, there is extremely limited evidence about the relative cost-effectiveness of different ACF implementation models. Cambodia presents a unique opportunity for addressing this gap in evidence as ACF has been implemented using different models, but no comparisons have been conducted. The objective of our study is to contribute to knowledge and methodology on comparing cost-effectiveness of alternative ACF implementation models from the health service perspective, using programmatic data, in order to inform national policy and practice. We retrospectively compared three distinct ACF implementation models - door to door symptom screening in urban slums, checking contacts of TB patients, and door to door symptom screening focusing on rural populations aged above 55 - in terms of the number of new bacteriologically-positive pulmonary TB cases diagnosed and the cost of implementation assuming activities are conducted by the national TB program of Cambodia. We calculated the cost per additional case detected using the alternative ACF models. Our analysis, which is the first of its kind for TB, revealed that the ACF model based on door to door screening in poor urban areas of Phnom Penh was the most cost-effective (249 USD per case detected, 737 cases diagnosed), followed by the model based on testing contacts of TB patients (308 USD per case detected, 807 cases diagnosed), and symptomatic screening of older rural populations (316 USD per case detected, 397 cases diagnosed). Our study provides new evidence on the relative effectiveness and economics of three implementation models for enhanced TB case finding, in line with calls for data from 'routine conditions' to be included in disease control program strategic planning. Such cost-effectiveness comparisons are essential to inform resource allocation decisions of national policy makers in resource constraint settings. We applied a novel, pragmatic methodological approach, which was designed to provide results that are directly relevant to policy makers, costing the interventions from Cambodia's national TB program's perspective and using case finding data from implementation activities, rather than experimental settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 154 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 18%
Researcher 18 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 7%
Student > Postgraduate 9 6%
Student > Bachelor 9 6%
Other 27 18%
Unknown 53 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 62 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 July 2021.
All research outputs
#4,625,964
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,501
of 7,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,701
of 317,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#25
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,366 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.