Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11043820›Full record

ReviewDrugs & aging2000

Pharmacoeconomics of influenza vaccination in the elderly: reviewing the available evidence.

M J Postma, R M Baltussen, M L Heijnen, L T de Berg, J C Jager

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs & aging, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. 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

5 authors.

M J PostmaGroningen University Institute for Drug Exploration/Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy The Netherlands. m.postma@farm.rug.nl
R M Baltussen
M L Heijnen
L T de Berg
J C Jager

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most western countries have influenza vaccination programmes for citizens aged > or = 65 years. This paper reviews the available evidence on whether elderly influenza vaccination is worthwhile from a pharmacoeconomic point of view. A search on Medline and EMBASE resulted in a primary selection of approximately 100 studies on the pharmacoeconomics of influenza vaccination in the elderly. Further selection of studies to be included in the review was based on several criteria such as original research paper, cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness analysis. influenza vaccination in the elderly, and publication between 1980 and 1999. The 10 studies included in the final selection were evaluated regarding 3 main aspects: benefit-cost ratio and cost-effectiveness ratio; vaccine effectiveness; and relative costing of the vaccine. In general, differences in benefit-cost ratios could be explained by differences in effectiveness and relative costing of the vaccine. Considering the available pharmacoeconomic evidence, influenza vaccination of the elderly in western countries is an intervention with favourable cost-effectiveness in terms of net costs per life-year gained and even has cost-saving potential. In particular, influenza vaccination among elderly people at higher risk, such as the chronically ill elderly, is generally found to be cost saving. Relatively favourable cost-effectiveness among non-high-risk elderly justifies universal influenza vaccination of the elderly from a pharmacoeconomic point of view.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisCosts and Cost AnalysisHumansInfluenza VaccinesVaccinationInfluenza Vaccines

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.