Briefly interpret the results of cost-effective analysis. Which strategy was more cost-effective in Washington, DC? Does that mean we should not use the less cost-effective strategy? This study assumed that the average transmission rates are same among the unawarePLWHAs regardless of testing strategies. Do you agree with the assumption? If not, how can we revise the assumption more realistic?

It is an essay questions . What information do you need ? This is the whole question .

Table 1. Cost-Effectiveness of HIV Testing Strategies a. number of tests 4591!! 11,2?63 b. number testing positive, unaware 1?? ?? c. portion of number testing positive, unaware 0.39%: 1.6296 :1. transmission rate from unaware HIV + 10.20% 10.20% e. transmission rate from aware HIV + 232955 232% f. number of transmissions averted 13.24 ?? g. testing cosE [$1 ??_ 1211,0355 h. labor oost [$1 99:13:91 ?? i. total cost [$1 ??' ??' j. cost per averted transmission [$1 ?? ?? Briey interpret the results of cost-effective analysis. Which strategy was more costeffective in Washington. DC? Does that mean we should not use the less cost-effective strategy? This study assumed that the average transmission rates are same among the unaware PLWHAs regardless of testing strategies. Do you agree with the assumption? If not, how can we revise the assumption more realistic