Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36436790›Full record

SynthesisValue in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research2023

Comparisons in the Health and Economic Assessments of Using Quadrivalent Versus Trivalent Influenza Vaccines: A Systematic Literature Review.

Clara R Warmath, Ismael R Ortega-Sanchez, Lindsey M Duca, Rachael M Porter, Molly G Usher, Joseph S Bresee, Kathryn E Lafond, William W Davis

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Clara R WarmathDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Ismael R Ortega-SanchezDivision of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Lindsey M DucaInfluenza Division, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Rachael M PorterInfluenza Division, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Molly G UsherDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
Joseph S BreseePartnership for Influenza Vaccine Introduction, The Task Force for Global Health, Decatur, GA, USA.
Kathryn E LafondInfluenza Division, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
William W DavisThailand MOPH-US CDC Collaboration, Nonthaburi, Thailand. Electronic address: wdavis@cdc.gov.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesSeasonal influenza vaccines protect against 3 (trivalent influenza vaccine [IIV3]) or 4 (quadrivalent influenza vaccine [IIV4]) viruses. IIV4 costs more than IIV3, and there is a trade-off between incremental cost and protection. This is especially the case in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with limited budgets; previous reviews have not identified studies of IIV4-IIV3 comparisons in LMICs. We summarized the literature that compared health and economic outcomes of IIV4 and IIV3, focused on LMICs.

methodsWe systematically searched 5 databases for articles published before October 6, 2021, that modeled health or economic effects of IIV4 versus IIV3. We abstracted data and compared findings among countries and models.

resultsThirty-eight studies fit our selection criteria; 10 included LMICs. Most studies (N = 31) reported that IIV4 was cost-saving or cost-effective compared with IIV3; we observed no difference in health or economic outcomes between LMICs and other countries. Based on cost differences of influenza vaccines, only one study compared coverage of IIV3 with IIV4 and reported that the maximum IIV4 price that would still yield greater public health impact than IIV3 was 13% to 22% higher than IIV3.

conclusionsWhen vaccination coverage with IIV4 and IIV3 is the same, IIV4 tends to be not only more effective but more cost-effective than IIV3, even with relatively high price differences between vaccine types. Alternatively, where funding is limited as in most LMICs, higher vaccine coverage can be achieved with IIV3 than IIV4, which could result in more favorable health and economic outcomes.

Indexed as

Influenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesBudgetsCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansPublic HealthInfluenza Vaccinescost-effectivenessinfluenzaquadrivalenttrivalentvaccine

Identifiers

PMID36436790
PMCPMC11950617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.