Skip to main content
Fig. 6 | BMC Health Services Research

Fig. 6

From: Cost-effectiveness analysis of newborn screening by tandem mass spectrometry in Shenzhen, China: value and affordability of new screening technology

Fig. 6

Tornado diagram of newborn screening parametersa, aThe parameters are sorted on the left according to their effect on incremental cost effectiveness ratio. The most influential parameter is on the top. EV: Expected value. P_X: The incidence of “X”, CT_X: The cost of treatment for “X”. “X” represents inborn errors of metabolism, including PCD, MMA, MSUD, IVA, PA, GA, MCAD, CIT-II (CIT 2), HCY, CIT I (CIT 1), VLCAD, PKU. U_Y: The utility of “Y”, CY: The cost of treatment for “Y”. “Y” represents states of the disease, including NS (No Sequela), DD (Development Delay), ND (Neurological Damage), MR (Mental Retardation), RD (Renal Damage). C_Pr: The program cost; C_MSScr: The cost of MS/MS screening test; C_FAScr: The cost of immunofluorescence screening test; C_FACom: The cost of MS/MS confirmation test; C_FACom: The cost of immunofluorescence confirmation test; CVisitMS: The cost of follow-up of the MS/MS screening program; CVisitFA: The cost of follow-up of the immunofluorescence screening program; CWage: The cost of lost productivity; Ctraffic: The cost of traffic

Back to article page