ArticleBMC medicine2018
Cost-benefit analysis of vaccination: a comparative analysis of eight approaches for valuing changes to mortality and morbidity risks.
Article in BMC medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Value(s) of Vaccination: Building the Scientific Evidence According to a Value-Based Healthcare Approach.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- A cost-benefit analysis of adult immunization programs across ten countries: Modeling the socioeconomic value of immunization for older populations compared to no vaccination.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Health and economic impacts of Lassa vaccination campaigns in West Africa.Nature medicine · 2024Article
- Analyses of the return on investment of public health interventions: a scoping review and recommendations for future studies.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Quantifying the economic gains associated with COVID-19 vaccination in the Canadian population: A cost-benefit analysis.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2023Article
- A model for estimating costs and benefits of new vaccine technologies from the perspective of both buyers and sellers.PloS one · 2023Article
- Article
- Acceptance and application of a broad population health perspective when evaluating vaccine.Vaccine · 2022Article
- An assessment of the vaccination of school-aged children in England against SARS-CoV-2.BMC medicine · 2022Article
- In the era of rapid mRNA-based vaccines: Why is there no effective hepatitis C virus vaccine yet?World journal of hepatology · 2021Review
- Parents' willingness to pay for a COVID-19 vaccine for themselves and their children in the United States.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
- Mothers' preferences and willingness-to-pay for human papillomavirus vaccines in Iran: A discrete choice experiment study.Preventive medicine reports · 2021Article
- Evaluating Vaccination Programs That Prevent Diseases With Potentially Catastrophic Health Outcomes: How Can We Capture the Value of Risk Reduction?Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2021Article
- An Introduction to the Main Types of Economic Evaluations Used for Informing Priority Setting and Resource Allocation in Healthcare: Key Features, Uses, and Limitations.Frontiers in public health · 2021Review
- Why vaccines matter: understanding the broader health, economic, and child development benefits of routine vaccination.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2020Article
- The State of Vaccine Confidence in Poland: A 2019 Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Conducting a Cost-Benefit Analysis of Transitional Care Programmes: The Key Challenges and Recommendations.International journal of integrated care · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is increasing interest in estimating the broader benefits of public health interventions beyond those captured in traditional cost-utility analyses. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in principle offers a way to capture such benefits, but a wide variety of methods have been used to monetise benefits in CBAs.
methodsTo understand the implications of different CBA approaches for capturing and monetising benefits and their potential impact on public health decision-making, we conducted a CBA of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in the United Kingdom using eight methods for monetising health and economic benefits, valuing productivity loss using either (1) the human capital or (2) the friction cost method, including the value of unpaid work in (3) human capital or (4) friction cost approaches, (5) adjusting for hard-to-fill vacancies in the labour market, (6) using the value of a statistical life, (7) monetising quality-adjusted life years and (8) including both productivity losses and monetised quality-adjusted life years. A previously described transmission dynamic model was used to project the impact of vaccination on cervical cancer outcomes. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to capture uncertainty in epidemiologic and economic parameters.
resultsTotal benefits of vaccination varied by more than 20-fold (£0.6-12.4 billion) across the approaches. The threshold vaccine cost (maximum vaccine cost at which HPV vaccination has a benefit-to-cost ratio above one) ranged from £69 (95% CI £56-£84) to £1417 (£1291-£1541).
conclusionsApplying different approaches to monetise benefits in CBA can lead to widely varying outcomes on public health interventions such as vaccination. Use of CBA to inform priority setting in public health will require greater convergence around appropriate methodology to achieve consistency and comparability across different studies.
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.