ArticleAdvances in therapy2014
Comparing cost-effectiveness results for a vaccine across different countries worldwide: what can we learn?
Article in Advances in therapy, 2014. 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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing value in health care: using an interpretive classification system to understand existing practices based on a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2019Pooled it
- Discounting health gain: a different view.Journal of market access & health policy · 2023Article
- Economic evaluation of using polygenic risk score to guide risk screening and interventions for the prevention of type 2 diabetes in individuals with high overall baseline risk.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- How to assess for the full economic value of vaccines? From past to present, drawing lessons for the future.Journal of market access & health policy · 2020Review
- Model-based assessment of public health impact and cost-effectiveness of dengue vaccination following screening for prior exposure.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2019Article
- 3. How comprehensive can we be in the economic assessment of vaccines?Journal of market access & health policy · 2017Review
- Towards a more comprehensive approach for a total economic assessment of vaccines?: 1. The building blocks for a health economic assessment of vaccination.Journal of market access & health policy · 2017Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of rotavirus vaccination in China: Projected possibility of scale-up from the current domestic option.BMC infectious diseases · 2016Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of rotavirus vaccination among Libyan children using a simple economic model.The Libyan journal of medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) using country-specific thresholds tied to gross domestic product (GDP) might not be appropriate in countries with low healthcare investment and a high disease burden as a consequence.
methodsUsing data from previously published CEA of rotavirus vaccination across nine countries worldwide, we calculated the cost neutral price (Pn) for the new intervention that reflects the price resulting in no net increase in health care costs compared with the current situation, and the maximum price (Pm) obtained with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) at the threshold value of 1×GDP/capita.
resultsIn countries with low GDP/capita, the paradoxical finding for rotavirus vaccination is that the Pm is much higher than in countries with a high GDP/capita. On the other hand, the Pn for the low GDP/capita countries is much lower than for high GDP/capita countries because of the low investment in health care.
conclusionIn countries with low healthcare investment and a high disease burden, the difference between the Pn and Pm for rotavirus vaccine which is the price range within which the ICER is below the World Health Organization (WHO) threshold value, is large. One reason could be that the WHO threshold value may not properly account for the local opportunity cost of health care expenditures. Therefore, either alternative threshold values should be selected or alternative economic assessment tools should be considered, such as budget optimisation or return on investment, if we want to communicate about real economic value of new vaccines in those countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.