Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30892178›Full record

ArticleEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin2019

Cost-effectiveness of measles control during elimination in Ontario, Canada, 2015.

Lauren C Ramsay, Natasha S Crowcroft, Shari Thomas, Elena Aruffo, Alexandra Teslya, Jane M Heffernan, Effie Gournis, Joanne Hiebert, Valerie Jaeger, Manisa Jiaravuthisan and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Measles outbreaks demand systems-level action locally, nationally and globally.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2019
    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

16 authors.

Lauren C RamsayPublic Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Natasha S CrowcroftPublic Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Shari ThomasPublic Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Elena AruffoYork University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Alexandra TeslyaYork University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jane M HeffernanYork University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Effie GournisUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Joanne HiebertPublic Health Agency of Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Valerie JaegerNiagara Region Public Health, Thorold, Ontario, Canada.
Manisa JiaravuthisanToronto Public Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jennifer SharronNiagara Region Public Health, Thorold, Ontario, Canada.
Alberto SeveriniPublic Health Agency of Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Shelley L DeeksPublic Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jonathan GubbayPublic Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Tony MazzulliPublic Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Beate SanderPublic Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundGiven that measles is eliminated in Canada and measles immunisation coverage in Ontario is high, it has been questioned whether Ontario's measles outbreak response is worthwhile.AimOur objective was to determine cost-effectiveness of measles containment protocols in Ontario from the healthcare payer perspective.MethodsWe developed a decision-analysis model comparing Ontario's measles containment strategy (based on actual 2015 outbreak data) with a hypothetical 'modified response'. The modified scenario assumed 10% response costs with reduced case and contact tracing and no outbreak-associated vaccinations; it was based on local and provincial administrative and laboratory data and parameters from peer-reviewed literature. Short- and long-term health outcomes, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs discounted at 1.5%, were estimated. We conducted one- and two-way sensitivity analyses.ResultsThe 2015 outbreak in Ontario comprised 16 measles cases and an estimated 3,369 contacts. Predictive modelling suggested that the outbreak response prevented 16 outbreak-associated cases at a cost of CAD 1,213,491 (EUR 861,579). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was CAD 739,063 (EUR 524,735) per QALY gained for the outbreak response vs modified response. To meet the commonly accepted cost-effectiveness threshold of CAD 50,000 (EUR 35,500) per QALY gained, the outbreak response would have to prevent 94 measles cases. In sensitivity analyses, the findings were robust.ConclusionsOntario's measles outbreak response exceeds generally accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds and may not be the most efficient use of public health resources from a healthcare payer perspective. These findings should be balanced against benefits of increased vaccine coverage and maintaining elimination status.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsAdolescentCanadaChildChild, PreschoolContact TracingCost-Benefit AnalysisDisease OutbreaksHealth ExpendituresHumansMeaslesOntarioPublic HealthQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuality of LifeVaccinationCanadaeconomic evaluationmeaslesmodellingpublic health policy

Identifiers

PMID30892178
PMCPMC6425553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.