Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35488964›Full record

SynthesisClinical drug investigation2022

An Umbrella Review of the Cost Effectiveness of Human Papillomavirus Vaccines.

Phuong T Tran, Munaza Riaz, Ziyan Chen, Cong Bang Truong, Vakaramoko Diaby

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical drug investigation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Appraisal of umbrella reviews on vaccines.Communications medicine · 2024
    Review
  5. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Phuong T TranFaculty of Pharmacy, HUTECH University, 475A Dien Bien Phu Street, Ward 25, Binh Thanh District, Ho Chi Minh City, 700000, Vietnam. tt.phuong@hutech.edu.vn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7022-1576
Munaza RiazDepartment of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2242-1274
Ziyan ChenDepartment of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5507-892X
Cong Bang TruongDepartment of Health Outcomes Research and Policy, Harrison School of Pharmacy, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8654-5444
Vakaramoko DiabyDepartment of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6251-0773
University of Florida · USAuburn University · USLahore College for Women University · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesAlthough many systematic reviews for the human papillomavirus vaccines cost effectiveness have been published, they vary in perspectives, methods, and quality. We aimed to condense systematically such evidence to facilitate locating, processing, and learning, not only about the consensus of findings but also how models were built and their evolution over time and across settings.

methodsWe conducted an umbrella review of cost-effectiveness studies for human papillomavirus vaccines using three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane). Based on their objectives, we classified studies into three groups (human papillomavirus vaccines cost effectiveness, model characteristics, and all-type vaccines, including human papillomavirus vaccines). We used the AMTAR2 to assess the quality of the studies. Additionally, we provided a summary of study findings, discussions, and evidence gaps in the literature.

resultsThough most studies were critically low quality and had a low quality of reporting, the human papillomavirus vaccine was consistently cost effective in young girls and men who have sex with men. Stratified analyses by rated quality did not change the results. The quality assessment of the reviews did not necessarily reflect the quality assessment of underlying studies. The human papillomavirus vaccine models became more complex over time, capturing more realistic disease transmission with different human papillomavirus strains and herd immunities.

conclusionsAdditional evidence is needed for vulnerable populations (e.g., childhood cancer survivors) who are at high risk for human papillomavirus vaccine-related cancers and, therefore, may be more cost effective when receiving human papillomavirus vaccines. Quantifying human papillomavirus vaccine cost effectiveness via meta-analyses is feasible if investigators can increase the homogeneity of their populations.

Indexed as

Papillomavirus InfectionsPapillomavirus VaccinesSexual and Gender MinoritiesChildCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHomosexuality, MaleHumansMalePapillomaviridaeVaccinationPapillomavirus Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID35488964
OpenAlexW4225156766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.