Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26187455›Full record

SynthesisClinical drug investigation2015

Extending the Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Programme to Include Males in High-Income Countries: A Systematic Review of the Cost-Effectiveness Studies.

Mohamed-Béchir Ben Hadj Yahia, Anaïs Jouin-Bortolotti, Benoît Dervaux

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical drug investigation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Adolescent HPV vaccination: empowerment, equity and ethics.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccination in Germany.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2017
    Article
  20. Human papillomavirus and gastrointestinal cancer: A review.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mohamed-Béchir Ben Hadj YahiaDepartment of Epidemiology, Health Economics and Prevention, Lille University Hospital, CHRU de Lille, Pôle S3P, Maison Régionale de la Recherche Clinique, 6, rue du Pr Laguesse, CS 70001, 59037, Lille Cedex, France, bechirbhy@gmail.com.
Anaïs Jouin-Bortolotti
Benoît Dervaux
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille · FRUniversité Lille Nord de France · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesGiving the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to females has been shown to be cost-effective in most countries. The epidemiological evidence and economic burden of HPV-related diseases have gradually been shown to be gender neutral. Randomized clinical trials report high efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of the HPV vaccine in males aged 16-26 years. Some pioneering countries extended their HPV vaccination programme to include males, regardless of the cost-effectiveness analysis results. Nevertheless, decision makers need evidence provided by modelling and economic studies to justify the funding of mass vaccination. This systematic review aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of extending the HPV vaccination programme to include males living in high-income countries.

methodsA systematic review of the cost-effectiveness analyses of HPV vaccination in males was performed. Data were extracted and analysed using a checklist adapted from the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards Statement.

resultsSeventeen studies and 12 underlying mathematical models were identified. Model filiation showed evolution in time from aggregate models (static and dynamic) to individual-based models. When considering the health outcomes HPV vaccines are licensed for, regardless of modelling approaches and assumptions, extending vaccinations to males is rarely found to be cost-effective in heterosexual populations. Cost-effectiveness ratios become more attractive when all HPV-related diseases are considered and when vaccine coverage in females is below 40%.

conclusionTargeted vaccination of men who have sex with men (MSM) seems to be the best cost-effectiveness option. The feasibility of this strategy is still an open question, since early identification of this specific population remains difficult.

Indexed as

VaccinationAdolescentAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisDeveloped CountriesFemaleHomosexuality, MaleHumansMalePapillomavirus InfectionsPapillomavirus VaccinesPapillomavirus Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID26187455
OpenAlexW908251538

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.