ArticleVaccines2021
Model Comparisons of the Cost Effectiveness of Rubella Vaccination Method in Japanese Adults.
Article in Vaccines, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intelligent system based comparative analysis study of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and antigenic proteins in different types of vaccines.Beni-Suef University journal of basic and applied sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The number of rubella cases has increased in Japan, especially among adults. Rubella infection in pregnant females can lead to congenital rubella syndrome (CRS). The Japanese government is promoting vaccination to prevent CRS. This study performs a cost-effectiveness analysis of the following four methods: (1) females who wished to become pregnant and partners, with an antibody-titer test; (2) females only, with an antibody-titer test; (3) females and males, without an antibody-titer test; (4) females only, without an antibody-titer test. A decision tree model with a hypothetical cohort of 500 males and 500 females was used for the analysis, and the parameters were obtained from previous studies. The number of avoidances of CRS was defined as the effect. Compared to the case where methods were not implemented, the number of CRS cases that can be prevented by implementing the methods was 0.0115589 by (1) and (3) and 0.0147891 by (2) and (4). The cost effectiveness of (1) to (4) was 287,413,677 JPY, 135,050,529 JPY, 388,524,974 JPY, and 197,744,219 JPY, respectively (1 JPY = 0.00963247 USD). Method (2) was the most cost-effective and did not change by sensitivity analysis. We conclude that the vaccination for females only with an antibody-titer test is recommended.
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.