Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Validation study design for detection of CIN in HIV-positive women.

In the validation study, which preceded the study presented here, all women were screened with all methods. After screening and diagnosis all women were followed up using study guidelines and local standards of care.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Strategies for cost-effectiveness analysis comparing cervical screening methods.

Colpo. = colposcopic biopsy, LSIL = low grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, ASCUS = atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance, ASC-H = atypical squamous cells cannot rule out high grade lesion, HSIL = high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, SCC = Squamous cell carcinoma

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Resources utilized to provide screening services.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Caseload scenarios: Total procedures possible per day per study nurse or doctor.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Average estimated procedure costs for each scenario (USD 2013), cost ranges for sensitivity analysis.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Screening outcomes, costs for screening analytic cohort for CIN 2+ (Functional Limit scenario).

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 3.

Comparison of screening methods: True cases of CIN2+ detected by cost per case.

NB: The line represents the cost-effectiveness threshold, or frontier. All interventions or combinations of interventions along this line are more cost effective than intervention or combination of interventions left of the line.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 5.

Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis (Functional Limit scenario).

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Threshold analysis comparing the costs of HPV DNA testing to actual and hypothetical Pap screening (Functional Limit scenario).

More »

Table 6 Expand