Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37038127›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2023

Cost-effectiveness of pharmaceutical strategies to prevent respiratory syncytial virus disease in young children: a decision-support model for use in low-income and middle-income countries.

Sarwat Mahmud, Ranju Baral, Colin Sanderson, Clint Pecenka, Mark Jit, You Li, Andrew Clark

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Sarwat MahmudDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Ranju BaralPATH, Seattle, WA, USA.
Colin SandersonDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Clint PecenkaPATH, Seattle, WA, USA.
Mark JitDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
You LiDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Andrew ClarkDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. andrew.clark@lshtm.ac.uk.
Faculty of Public Health · GBProgram for Appropriate Technology in Health · USNanjing Medical University · CNPublic Health England · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRespiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of respiratory disease in young children. A number of mathematical models have been used to assess the cost-effectiveness of RSV prevention strategies, but these have not been designed for ease of use by multidisciplinary teams working in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).

methodsWe describe the UNIVAC decision-support model (a proportionate outcomes static cohort model) and its approach to exploring the potential cost-effectiveness of two RSV prevention strategies: a single-dose maternal vaccine and a single-dose long-lasting monoclonal antibody (mAb) for infants. We identified model input parameters for 133 LMICs using evidence from the literature and selected national datasets. We calculated the potential cost-effectiveness of each RSV prevention strategy (compared to nothing and to each other) over the lifetimes of all children born in the year 2025 and compared our results to a separate model published by PATH. We ran sensitivity and scenario analyses to identify the inputs with the largest influence on the cost-effectiveness results.

resultsOur illustrative results assuming base case input assumptions for maternal vaccination ($3.50 per dose, 69% efficacy, 6 months protection) and infant mAb ($3.50 per dose, 77% efficacy, 5 months protection) showed that both interventions were cost-saving compared to status quo in around one-third of 133 LMICs, and had a cost per DALY averted below 0.5 times the national GDP per capita in the remaining LMICs. UNIVAC generated similar results to a separate model published by PATH. Cost-effectiveness results were most sensitive to changes in the price, efficacy and duration of protection of each strategy, and the rate (and cost) of RSV hospital admissions.

conclusionsForthcoming RSV interventions (maternal vaccines and infant mAbs) are worth serious consideration in LMICs, but there is a good deal of uncertainty around several influential inputs, including intervention price, efficacy, and duration of protection. The UNIVAC decision-support model provides a framework for country teams to build consensus on data inputs, explore scenarios, and strengthen the local ownership and policy-relevance of results.

Indexed as

Communicable DiseasesRespiratory Syncytial Virus, HumanRespiratory Syncytial Virus InfectionsAntibodies, MonoclonalChildChild, PreschoolCost-Benefit AnalysisDeveloping CountriesHumansInfantPharmaceutical PreparationsAntibodies, MonoclonalPharmaceutical PreparationsEconomic evaluationLMICsMaternal vaccineMonoclonal antibodyRSV

Identifiers

PMID37038127
PMCPMC10088159
OpenAlexW4363625449

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.