Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35255920›Full record

ReviewBMC medicine2022

WHO-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing: process, methods, and findings.

Ann Levin, Laura Boonstoppel, Logan Brenzel, Ulla Griffiths, Raymond Hutubessy, Mark Jit, Vittal Mogasale, Sarah Pallas, Stephen Resch, Christian Suharlim and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReviewConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. The cost of delivering COVID-19 vaccines in four districts in Malawi.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Economic burden of measles outbreaks: a cost-of-illness study in a middle-income country in the post-elimination era.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Costs of seasonal influenza vaccination in South Africa.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2022
    Review
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

11 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

Ann LevinLevin & Morgan LLC, Bethesda, USA.
Laura Boonstoppel *ThinkWell, Geneva, Switzerland.
Logan Brenzel *Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, USA.
Ulla Griffiths *UNICEF, New York, USA.
Raymond Hutubessy *Department of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. hutubessyr@who.int.
Mark Jit *London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Vittal Mogasale *International Vaccine Institute, Seoul, South Korea.
Sarah Pallas *Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA.
Stephen Resch *Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, USA.
Christian Suharlim *Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, USA.
Karene Hoi Ting Yeung *Department of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Harvard University · USWorld Health Organization · CHBill & Melinda Gates Foundation · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USInternational Vaccine Institute · KRLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMorgan, Lewis & Bockius (United States) · USUnited Nations Children's Fund · US

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDifferences in definitions and methodological approaches have hindered comparison and synthesis of economic evaluation results across multiple health domains, including immunization. At the request of the World Health Organization's (WHO) Immunization and Vaccines-related Implementation Research Advisory Committee (IVIR-AC), WHO convened an ad hoc Vaccine Delivery Costing Working Group, comprising experts from eight organizations working in immunization costing, to address a lack of standardization and gaps in definitions and methodological guidance. The aim of the Working Group was to develop a consensus statement harmonizing terminology and principles and to formulate recommendations for vaccine delivery costing for decision making. This paper discusses the process, findings of the review, and recommendations in the Consensus Statement.

methodsThe Working Group conducted several interviews, teleconferences, and one in-person meeting to identify groups working in vaccine delivery costing as well as existing guidance documents and costing tools, focusing on those for low- and middle-income country settings. They then reviewed the costing aims, perspectives, terms, methods, and principles in these documents. Consensus statement principles were drafted to align with the Global Health Cost Consortium costing guide as an agreed normative reference, and consensus definitions were drafted to reflect the predominant view across the documents reviewed.

resultsThe Working Group identified four major workstreams on vaccine delivery costing as well as nine guidance documents and eleven costing tools for immunization costing. They found that some terms and principles were commonly defined while others were specific to individual workstreams. Based on these findings and extensive consultation, recommendations to harmonize differences in terminology and principles were made.

conclusionsUse of standardized principles and definitions outlined in the Consensus Statement within the immunization delivery costing community of practice can facilitate interpretation of economic evidence by global, regional, and national decision makers. Improving methodological alignment and clarity in program costing of health services such as immunization is important to support evidence-based policies and optimal resource allocation. On the other hand, this review and Consensus Statement development process revealed the limitations of our ability to harmonize given that study designs will vary depending upon the policy question that is being addressed and the country context.

Indexed as

Global HealthVaccinesHumansImmunization ProgramsVaccinationWorld Health OrganizationVaccinesConsensus statementCostingDelivery costGuidelineImmunizationVaccine

Identifiers

PMID35255920
PMCPMC8902809
OpenAlexW4220692402

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.