{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02418207681365576, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012802275960170697, 'mean_word_length': 4.587301587301587, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cost-effectiveness of antenatal anti-D prophylaxis.

This paper estimates the incremental cost-effectiveness of providing antenatal anti-D prophylaxis in varying dose sizes to either primigravidae or all Rh D negative women. It presents a model for calculating the net cost per 1000 'at risk' women based on the costs of anti-D prophylaxis and the future NHS costs avoided. Incremental cost-effectiveness is measured in terms of the net cost per Rh D-alloimmunization and the net cost per Rh HD loss prevented. Programmes for Rh D negative primigravidae are more cost-effective than the same dose protocol extended to all Rh D negative women. The 1 x 1250 iu programme is the most cost-effective option.