ArticleHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2020
Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of a sequential pneumococcal vaccination compared to single-dose vaccination strategy for adults in Hong Kong.
Article in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Towards a Multi-sectoral Approach to Population Health: A Scoping Review of Cross-sectoral Evaluations of Health Interventions.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Review
- Association between introduction of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine and burden of hospitalized adult pneumococcal disease in Hong Kong - A retrospective database study.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Vaccination Strategies and Research Gaps in Hepatitis E Virus for Special Populations.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Article
- Response to Shami et al. 'Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of a sequential pneumococcal vaccination compared to single dose vaccination strategy for adults in Hong Kong' (Hum Vacc Immunother 2020).Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two vaccines, 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) and 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13), are widely available for the prevention of pneumococcal disease in adults. However, it is unclear how cost-effective these pneumococcal vaccine choices are in the Hong Kong healthcare environment. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of a sequential administration of PCV13 followed by PPSV23 compared to a single dose of PPSV23 vaccination for pneumococcal disease control in Hong Kong adults aged ≥65 years and individuals aged 20-64 years with immunocompromising and chronic conditions. A previously developed deterministic cohort sequential model was applied to compare the outcomes of two vaccination strategies from a societal perspective. Population-specific model input, including incidence, mortality, case-fatality, risk group distribution, vaccination costs, disease management, and productivity loss, was estimated from a Hong Kong-wide electronic medical database. Costs were valued in US$ in 2017. Vaccination strategies with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER, defined as incremental cost per QALY saved) less than one local GDP per capita ($46,193 in 2017) were defined as highly cost-effective. Deterministic sensitivity analyses (SA) were conducted. Compared with single-dose PPSV23, sequential vaccination of PCV13 followed by PPSV23 was cost-saving for adults aged ≥20 years. In the deterministic SA, the base-case results were robust for tested parameter uncertainties. Future vaccination policies should consider the cost-effectiveness of a sequential vaccination strategy as a measure to reduce the vaccine-preventable pneumococcal disease burden in Hong Kong.
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.