ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2020
The economic impact and cost-effectiveness of combined vector-control and dengue vaccination strategies in Thailand: results from a dynamic transmission model.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Wolbachia-carrying Aedes mosquitoes for preventing dengue infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Mathematical models for dengue fever epidemiology: A 10-year systematic review.Physics of life reviews · 2022Pooled it
- The cost-effectiveness of Wolbachia-based biocontrol interventions for dengue: A scoping review of the available evidence.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Addressing Gaps in Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices in Thailand for Integrating Vaccines into a Comprehensive Dengue Management and Control Programme.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Evaluating the effectiveness of different intervention measures for a dengue outbreak in Hangzhou based on a dynamic model.BMC public health · 2026Article
- ExploitingPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Estimating per-infection cost and burden for dengue and Zika as a function of antibody-dependent enhancement.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- Article
- Simulation-based economic evaluation of the Wolbachia method in Brazil: a cost-effective strategy for dengue control.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of aLancet regional health. Americas · 2024Article
- Assessing the potential impact of livestock immunisation and acaricide use on controlling the spread of East Coast fever.Parasite epidemiology and control · 2024Article
- [Rapid review: effectiveness of theRevista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2024Article
- Article
- Reducing dengue fever cases at the lowest budget: a constrained optimization approach applied to Thailand.BMC public health · 2021Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsDengue fever is a major public health problem in tropical/subtropical regions. Prior economic analyses have predominantly evaluated either vaccination or vector-control programmes in isolation and do not really consider the incremental benefits and cost-effectiveness of mixed strategies and combination control. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of single and combined approaches in Thailand.
methodsThe impacts of different control interventions were analysed using a previously published mathematical model of dengue epidemiology and control incorporating seasonality, age structure, consecutive infection, cross protection, immune enhancement and combined vector-host transmission. An economic model was applied to simulation results to estimate the cost-effectiveness of 4 interventions and their various combinations (6 strategies): i) routine vaccination of 1-year olds; ii) chemical vector control strategies targeting adult and larval stages separately; iii) environmental management/ public health education and awareness [EM/ PHEA]). Payer and societal perspectives were considered. The health burden of dengue fever was assessed using disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) lost. Costs and effects were assessed for 10 years. Costs were discounted at 3% annually and updated to 2013 United States Dollars. Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out after strategies were rank-ordered by cost, with results presented in a table of incremental analysis. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were undertaken; and the impact and cost-effectiveness of Wolbachia was evaluated in exploratory scenario analyses.
resultsFrom the payer and societal perspectives, 2 combination strategies were considered optimal, as all other control strategies were dominated. Vaccination plus adulticide plus EM/ PHEA was deemed cost-effective according to multiple cost-effectiveness criteria. From the societal perspective, incremental differences vs. adulticide and EM/ PHEA resulted in costs of $157.6 million and DALYs lost of 12,599, giving an expected ICER of $12,508 per DALY averted. Exploratory scenario analyses showed Wolbachia to be highly cost-effective ($343 per DALY averted) vs. other single control measures.
conclusionsOur model shows that individual interventions can be cost-effective, but that important epidemiological reductions and economic impacts are demonstrated when interventions are combined as part of an integrated approach to combating dengue fever. Exploratory scenario analyses demonstrated the potential epidemiological and cost-effective impact of Wolbachia when deployed at scale on a nationwide basis. Our findings were robust in the face of sensitivity analyses.
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.