Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34870256›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2022

Optimising health and economic impacts of COVID-19 vaccine prioritisation strategies in the WHO European Region: a mathematical modelling study.

Yang Liu, Frank G Sandmann, Rosanna C Barnard, Carl A B Pearson, Roberta Pastore, Richard Pebody, Stefan Flasche, Mark Jit

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Employees Working from Home: Do Leadership Factors Influence Work-Related Stress and Musculoskeletal Pain?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yang LiuDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Keppel St, London, United Kingdom WC1E 7HT.
Frank G SandmannDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Keppel St, London, United Kingdom WC1E 7HT.
Rosanna C BarnardDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Keppel St, London, United Kingdom WC1E 7HT.
Carl A B PearsonDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Keppel St, London, United Kingdom WC1E 7HT.
Roberta PastoreWorld Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe; UN City, Marmorvej 51, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Richard PebodyWorld Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe; UN City, Marmorvej 51, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Stefan FlascheDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Keppel St, London, United Kingdom WC1E 7HT.
Mark JitDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Keppel St, London, United Kingdom WC1E 7HT.
University of London · GBWorld Health Organization Regional Office for Europe · DK

Funding

Does repeated influenza vaccination constrain influenza immune responses and protection?R01AI141534 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE · PI FOX, ANNETTE, KUCHARSKI, ADAM JAMES · 2019 to 2023
$4.9M
Medical Research Council MC_PC_19065Medical Research Council MR/P014658/1Medical Research Council MR/S003975/1NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI141534Wellcome TrustWorld Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCountries in the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region differ in terms of the COVID-19 vaccine supply conditions. We evaluated the health and economic impact of different age-based vaccine prioritisation strategies across this demographically and socio-economically diverse region.

methodsWe fitted age-specific compartmental models to the reported daily COVID-19 mortality in 2020 to inform the immunity level before vaccine roll-out. Models capture country-specific differences in population structures, contact patterns, epidemic history, life expectancy, and GDP per capita.We examined four strategies that prioritise: all adults (V+), younger (20-59 year-olds) followed by older adults (60+) (V20), older followed by younger adults (V60), and the oldest adults (75+) (V75) followed by incrementally younger age groups. We explored four roll-out scenarios (R1-4) - the slowest scenario (R1) reached 30% coverage by December 2022 and the fastest (R4) 80% by December 2021. Five decision-making metrics were summarised over 2021-22: mortality, morbidity, and losses in comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy, comorbidity- and quality-adjusted life years, and human capital. Six vaccine profiles were tested - the highest performing vaccine has 95% efficacy against both infection and disease, and the lowest 50% against diseases and 0% against infection.

findingsOf the 20 decision-making metrics and roll-out scenario combinations, the same optimal strategy applied to all countries in only one combination; V60 was more or similarly desirable than V75 in 19 combinations. Of the 38 countries with fitted models, 11-37 countries had variable optimal strategies by decision-making metrics or roll-out scenarios. There are greater benefits in prioritising older adults when roll-out is slow and when vaccine profiles are less favourable.

interpretationThe optimal age-based vaccine prioritisation strategies were sensitive to country characteristics, decision-making metrics, and roll-out speeds. A prioritisation strategy involving more age-based stages (V75) does not necessarily lead to better health and economic outcomes than targeting broad age groups (V60). Countries expecting a slow vaccine roll-out may particularly benefit from prioritising older adults.

fundingWorld Health Organization, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Medical Research Council (United Kingdom), the National Institute of Health Research (United Kingdom), the European Commission, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (United Kingdom), Wellcome Trust.

Indexed as

COVID-19EuropeHealth economicsMathematical modellingMulticountry analysisPolicy evaluationVaccine policy

Identifiers

PMID34870256
PMCPMC8629724
OpenAlexW3217176151

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.