Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21504245›Full record

ReviewPharmacoEconomics2011

Rotavirus vaccine RIX4414 (Rotarix™): a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in the prevention of rotavirus gastroenteritis in developed countries.

Greg L Plosker

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Vaccines against poverty.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

1 author.

Greg L PloskerAdis, a Wolters Kluwer Business, Auckland, New Zealand. demail@adis.co.nz

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The most common cause of severe diarrhoea in infants and young children is rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE), which is associated with significant morbidity, healthcare resource use and direct and indirect costs in industrialized nations. The monovalent rotavirus vaccine RIX4414 (Rotarix™) is administered as a two-dose oral series in infants and has demonstrated protective efficacy against RVGE in clinical trials conducted in developed countries. In addition, various naturalistic studies have demonstrated 'real-world' effectiveness after the introduction of widespread rotavirus vaccination programmes in the community setting. Numerous cost-effectiveness analyses have been conducted in developed countries in which a universal rotavirus vaccination programme using RIX4414 was compared with no universal rotavirus vaccination programme. There was a high degree of variability in base-case results across studies even when conducted in the same country, often reflecting differences in the selection of data sources or assumptions used to populate the models. In addition, results were sensitive to plausible changes in a number of key input parameters. As such, it is not possible to definitively state whether a universal rotavirus vaccination programme with RIX4414 is cost effective in developed countries, although results of some analyses in some countries suggest this is the case. In addition, international guidelines advocate universal vaccination of infants and children against rotavirus. It is also difficult to draw conclusions regarding the cost effectiveness of rotavirus vaccine RIX4414 relative to that of the pentavalent rotavirus vaccine, which is administered as a three-dose oral series. Although indirect comparisons in cost-effectiveness analyses indicate that RIX4414 provided more favourable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios when each vaccine was compared with no universal rotavirus vaccination programme, results were generally sensitive to vaccine costs. Actual tender prices of a full vaccination course for each vaccine were not known at the time of the analyses and therefore had to be estimated.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsChildChild, PreschoolClinical Trials as TopicCost-Benefit AnalysisDeveloped CountriesGastroenteritisHumansInfantRotavirus InfectionsRotavirus VaccinesVaccines, AttenuatedRIX4414 vaccineRotavirus VaccinesVaccines, Attenuated

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.