MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226307159 · doi:10.1016/j.lana.2021.100160

Cost of community-based human papillomavirus self-sampling in Peru: A micro-costing study

2021· article· en· W4226307159 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Michelle Shin, Patricia García, Enrique M. Saldarriaga, José L. Fiestas, Kristjana Ásbjörnsdóttir, Sarah Iribarren, Ruanne V. Barnabas, Sarah Gimbel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Regional Health - Americas · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFogarty International CenterGrand Challenges Canada
KeywordsActivity-based costingSampling (signal processing)Unit costUnit (ring theory)Nonprobability samplingMedicineOperations managementBusinessPsychologyEnvironmental healthMarketingComputer scienceEconomicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cost data of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling programs from low-and-middle-income countries is limited. We estimated the total and unit costs associated with the Hope Project, a community-based HPV self-sampling social entrepreneurship in Peru. Methods: We conducted a micro-costing analysis from the program perspective to determine the unit costs of (1) recruitment/training of community women (Hope Ladies); (2) Hope Ladies distributing HPV self-sampling kits in their communities and the laboratory testing; and (3) Hope Ladies linking screened women with follow-up care. A procedural manual was used to identify the program's activities. A structured questionnaire and in-depth interviews were conducted with administrators to estimate the resource/time associated with activities. We obtained unit costs for each input previously identified from budgets and expenditure reports. Findings: From November 2018 to March 2020, the program recruited and trained 62 Hope Ladies who distributed 4,882 HPV self-sampling kits in their communities. Of the screened women, 586 (12%) tested HPV positive. The annual cost per Hope Lady recruited/trained was $147·51 (2018 USD). The cost per HPV self-sampling kit distributed/tested was $45·39, the cost per woman followed up with results was $55·64, and the cost per HPV-positive woman identified was $378·14. Personnel and laboratory costs represented 56·1% and 24·7% of the total programmatic cost, respectively. Interpretation: Our findings indicate that implementation of a community-based HPV self-sampling has competitive prices, which increases its likelihood to be feasible in Peru. Further economic evaluation is needed to quantify the incremental benefits of HPV self-sampling compared to more established options such as Pap tests. Funding: Thomas Francis Jr. Fellowship provided funding for data collection. The Hope Project was funded by grants from Grand Challenges Canada (TTS-1812-21131), Uniting for Health Innovation, Global Initiative Against HPV and Cervical Cancer, University of Manitoba, and the John E. Fogarty International Center (5D43TW009375-05).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.463
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.065 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Regional Health - AmericasSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207