ArticlePLOS global public health2023
Pay-it-forward influenza vaccination among older adults and children: A cost-effectiveness analysis in China.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pay-it-forward intervention increased pneumococcal vaccine uptake among older adults in China: a randomized controlled trial.BMC medicine · 2026Trial
- Article
- Evaluating the impact of the vaccination prescription program on herpes zoster vaccine coverage in Ningbo, China: An interrupted time series analysis.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
Abstract
A quasi-experimental study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a pay-it-forward strategy for increasing influenza vaccination among children and older adults compared to a self-paid vaccination strategy in China. Pay-it-forward is an innovative community-engaged intervention in which participants receive a free influenza vaccination and are then asked if they would like to donate or create a message to support subsequent vaccinations. This economic evaluation used a decision-tree model to compare pay-it-forward to a standard of care arm in which patients had to pay for their own influenza vaccine. The analysis was performed from the healthcare provider perspective and costs were calculated with 2020 United States dollars. The time horizon was one year. In the base case analysis, pay-it-forward was more effective (111 vs 55 people vaccinated) but more costly than standard-of-care ($4477 vs $2725). Pay-it-forward spurred 96.4% (107/111) of individuals to voluntarily donate to support influenza vaccination for high-risk groups in China. Further costing and implementation research is needed to inform scale up.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.