ArticlePloS one2018
Estimating the cost-effectiveness of an infant 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine national immunization program in China.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Inclusion of Additional Unintended Consequences in Economic Evaluation: A Systematic Review of Immunization and Tuberculosis Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2021Pooled it
- Cost of Nine Pediatric Infectious Illnesses in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review of Cost-of-Illness Studies.PharmacoEconomics · 2020Pooled it
- Review
- Economic Evaluation of Pneumococcal Vaccination in Egypt: Cost-Effectiveness, Budget Impact, and Domestic Manufacturing Potential.Vaccines · 2026Article
- Conceptual Methodological Framework for Incorporating Antimicrobial Resistance Considerations in Economic Models for Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccines.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2025Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Pneumococcal Vaccines in the Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Coverage of 13-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine Among Children 0-15 Months of Age - 9 Provinces, China, 2019-2021.China CDC weekly · 2023Article
- Estimating national, regional and provincial cost-effectiveness of introducing childhood 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccination in China: a modelling analysis.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2023Article
- A guideline for economic evaluations of vaccines and immunization programs in China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- The Cost-Effectiveness of 13-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Seven Chinese Cities.Vaccines · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of domestic 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine for children under 5 years of age in mainland China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
- Health and economic impact of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in hindering antimicrobial resistance in China.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of uterine balloon tamponade devices in managing atonic post-partum hemorrhage at public health facilities in India.PloS one · 2021Article
- Pneumococcal Vaccination for Children in Asian Countries: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluation Studies.Vaccines · 2020Review
- Clinical characteristics and antimicrobial resistance of pneumococcal isolates of pediatric invasive pneumococcal disease in China.Infection and drug resistance · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe burden of pneumococcal disease in China is high, and a 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) recently received regulatory approval and is available to Chinese infants. PCV13 protects against the most prevalent serotypes causing invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in China, but will not provide full societal benefits until made broadly available through a national immunization program (NIP).
objectiveTo estimate clinical and economic benefits of introducing PCV13 into a NIP in China using local cost estimates and accounting for variability in vaccine uptake and indirect (herd protection) effects.
methodsWe developed a population model to estimate the effect of PCV13 introduction in China. Modeled health states included meningitis, bacteremia, pneumonia (PNE), acute otitis media, death and sequelae, and no disease. Direct healthcare costs and disease incidence data for IPD and PNE were derived from the China Health Insurance and Research Association database; all other parameters were derived from published literature. We estimated total disease cases and associated costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and deaths for three scenarios from a Chinese Payer Perspective: (1) direct effects only, (2) direct+indirect effects for IPD only, and (3) direct+indirect effects for IPD and inpatient PNE.
resultsScenario (1) resulted in 370.3 thousand QALYs gained and 12.8 thousand deaths avoided versus no vaccination. In scenarios (2) and (3), the PCV13 NIP gained 383.2 thousand and 3,580 thousand QALYs, and avoided 13.1 thousand and 147.5 thousand deaths versus no vaccination, respectively. In all three scenarios, the vaccination cost was offset by cost reductions from prevented disease yielding net costs of ¥29,362.32 million, ¥29,334.29 million, and ¥13,524.72 million, respectively. All resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratios fell below a 2x China GDP cost-effectiveness threshold across a range of potential vaccine prices. DISCUSSION: Initiation of a PCV13 NIP in China incurs large upfront costs but is good value for money, and is likely to prevent substantial cases of disease among children and non-vaccinated individuals.
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.