Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22413761›Full record

SynthesisDrugs2012

The cost effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccines: a systematic review.

Katherine Seto, Fawziah Marra, Adam Raymakers, Carlo A Marra

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Drugs, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Economic Burden of Cervical Cancer in Bulgaria.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Pricing of HPV vaccines in European tender-based settings.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katherine SetoFaculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Fawziah Marra
Adam Raymakers
Carlo A Marra
University of British Columbia · CAProvidence Health Care · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHuman papillomavirus (HPV) is one of the world's most common sexually transmitted infections, and has been associated with a number of cervical and non-cervical diseases, including cancer. HPV vaccines have been licensed for use in females for some time, but the quadrivalent vaccine has only recently become licensed for use in males. Many countries have adopted a vaccination programme for adolescent females based on results of cost-effectiveness analyses. However, given the new indications for use of the vaccine in males, decision makers require information on the cost effectiveness of vaccinating males in order to make policy decisions on whether or not to fund such programmes.

objectiveOur objective was to conduct a qualitative systematic review to update a previously conducted review of HPV vaccine studies.

methodsArticles were obtained from an extensive literature search to determine the cost effectiveness of implementing an HPV vaccination programme with routine cervical cancer screening. A total of 29 studies were included in this review. Seventeen of the included articles looked only at cervical disease outcomes, and 12 studies also included non-cervical disease outcomes. Four studies explored the economic impact of vaccinating both boys and girls. One study focused on a population of men who have sex with men (MSM).

resultsWhile different model structures, input parameters and baseline assumptions were used, the consistent message in studies that focused on female-only vaccination programmes was that routine vaccination of females is cost effective compared with cervical cancer screening alone. DISCUSSION: Based on the currently available literature, it appears that the addition of boys to a vaccination programme generally exceeds traditional cost-effectiveness thresholds. The MSM population represents a potential additional target for routine HPV vaccination; however, more cost-effectiveness studies are required before making such a policy change.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleModels, EconomicPapillomavirus InfectionsPapillomavirus VaccinesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUterine Cervical NeoplasmsPapillomavirus Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID22413761
OpenAlexW1598581251

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.