What threshold is worth it AND deliverable AND affordable?
The Decision Curve Analysis chart answers whether screening is clinically worth it, but on its own it makes the lowest threshold always look best because it ignores workforce and cost. This calculator closes that gap with two separate questions, kept deliberately apart:
A. Feasibility. Given the workforce that exists today, what fraction of the population can be served? The operational net benefit curve discounts clinical benefit by that fraction, so it peaks at a real optimum instead of always favouring the lowest threshold.
B. Resourcing. To screen everyone above the threshold, tick the clinician types, set the workload split, and the planner returns clinicians needed, consult fees, false positives and biopsy costs - so AI shows up as cheap per read but expensive in downstream biopsies.
Every workforce and cost assumption is yours to edit in the right-hand rail; the graph, the planner table, and the live map all update instantly.
3.0%
A · Feasibility with today's workforce
The threshold that is actually deliverable
Faint line: clinical net benefit (what the DCA chart shows; keeps rising as the threshold drops). Bold line: that benefit discounted by the share of Australians whose existing regional workforce could deliver screening. It sits near zero below ~2% because demand is so large almost no region copes, then peaks at a finite optimum.
Clinical net benefit (ignores workforce)Operational net benefit (deliverable)Deliverable optimum (3%)Selected threshold
At 3.0%, 68% of Australians live in regions whose existing workforce could cope. Deliverable optimum: 3%.
B · Workforce & cost planner
Resourcing 1.49M screens / year at 3.0%
Tick the workforce types that would deliver screening, then set the share of the workload each carries. The planner distributes the annual demand, then computes clinicians needed (from consult duration), consult fees, and the false-positives each modality generates.
Workload split (auto-normalised to 100%)
Dermatologist30%
Skin-cancer GP45%
AI triage25%
Workforce
Share
Screens/yr
Clinicians (FTE)
Consult cost
Biopsies/yr
Biopsy cost
Dermatologist
30%
448k
534
$71.7M
54k
$17.8M
Skin-cancer GP
45%
673k
1,868
$60.5M
105k
$34.6M
AI triage
25%
374k
4
$3.0M
112k
$37.0M
Total
100%
1.49M
2,406
$135.3M
271k
$89.4M
Total annual cost
$224.7M
consults + biopsies
Clinicians needed
2,406
total FTE across mix
Melanomas detected/yr
13k
sensitivity 55%
Cost per melanoma
$17.5k
not a cost/QALY
Cost per person screened
$150
incl. biopsy share
Total biopsies/yr
271k
12% base rate
People invited
2.99M
10-yr cohort
Benefit : cost
—
set value/melanoma →
Live map
Who can cope at 3.0%?
Each SA4 coloured by capacity utilisation under today's real derm + GP workforce and your productivity assumptions. Red = demand exceeds capacity. Editing consult duration or annual hours in the rail recolours this instantly.