Evidence mapPaperPMID 41222864Full record

ReviewApplied health economics and health policy2026

Data-Related and Methodological Challenges in Assessing the Cost-Effectiveness of Traditional and Genomic Newborn Screening Programs.

Ramesh Lamsal, Hadley Stevens Smith, Scott D Grosse

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Applied health economics and health policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ramesh LamsalPrecision Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, 401 Park Drive, Suite 401 East, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. Ramesh_Lamsal@hphci.harvard.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5277-5049
Hadley Stevens Smith *Precision Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, 401 Park Drive, Suite 401 East, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1247-6535
Scott D Grosse *Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1078-6855

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As newborn screening (NBS) programs consider adding conditions, policymakers would benefit from evidence showing whether early screening offers greater economic and health benefits than standard clinical diagnosis and treatment. However, economic evaluations have not been consistently used to guide decisions on expansion of NBS programs globally. This narrative review discusses data-related and methodological challenges in conducting cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of NBS programs including (1) difficulties in identifying appropriate comparators and related data, (2) gaps in understanding and limited data on health outcomes and costs of care among children with newborn-screened conditions who received effective treatment after clinical diagnosis without screening, (3) lack of data on short- and longer-term costs and outcomes for affected individuals identified through screening, (4) challenges in distinguishing the effects of screening from improvements in treatment over time, and (5) limited data on costs outside of the healthcare system, limiting the ability to conduct evaluations from the societal perspective. Advancements in genomic technologies, such as genomic sequencing and gene-targeted therapies, are expanding the number of conditions that are potential targets for NBS. Genomic NBS poses additional challenges for CEAs that stem from the ability to simultaneously identify hundreds or even thousands of conditions and limitations of knowledge of genotype-phenotype associations. The data-related challenges discussed herein may encourage cross-disciplinary collaboration to improve data collection. Addressing these methodological issues is imperative for generating reliable evidence on the costs and benefits of NBS program expansion, thereby supporting informed policymaking on adding new conditions to NBS programs.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisGenetic TestingGenomicsNeonatal ScreeningHumansInfant, Newborn

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.