ArticleVaccines2024
An Application of an Initial Full Value of Vaccine Assessment Methodology to Measles-Rubella MAPs for Use in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.
Article in Vaccines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Priority implementation research for measles-rubella microarray patches identified using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Measles and rubella: From global health challenges to advancements in molecular diagnostics in the elimination era.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2025Review
- Article
- New approaches to measles eradication, with special reference to Africa.The Pan African medical journal · 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Measles and rubella micro-array patches (MR-MAPs) are a promising innovation to address limitations of the current needle and syringe (N&S) presentation due to their single-dose presentation, ease of use, and improved thermostability. To direct and accelerate further research and interventions, an initial full value vaccine assessment (iFVVA) was initiated prior to MR-MAPs entering phase I trials to quantify their value and identify key data gaps and challenges. The iFVVA utilized a mixed-methods approach with rapid assessment of literature, stakeholder interviews and surveys, and quantitative data analyses to (i) assess global need for improved MR vaccines and how MR-MAPs could address MR problem statements; (ii) estimate costs and benefits of MR-MAPs; (iii) identify the best pathway from development to delivery; and (iv) identify outstanding areas of need where stakeholder intervention can be helpful. These analyses found that if MR-MAPs are broadly deployed, they can potentially reach an additional 80 million children compared to the N&S presentation between 2030-2040. MR-MAPs can avert up to 37 million measles cases, 400,000 measles deaths, and 26 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). MR-MAPs with the most optimal product characteristics of low price, controlled temperature chain (CTC) properties, and small cold chain volumes were shown to be cost saving for routine immunization (RI) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared to N&S. Uncertainties about price and future vaccine coverage impact the potential cost-effectiveness of introducing MR-MAPs in LMICs, indicating that it could be cost-effective in 16-81% of LMICs. Furthermore, this iFVVA highlighted the importance of upfront donor investment in manufacturing set-up and clinical studies and the critical influence of an appropriate price to ensure country and manufacturer financial sustainability. To ensure that MR-MAPs achieve the greatest public health benefit, MAP developers, vaccine manufacturers, donors, financiers, and policy- and decision-makers will need close collaboration and open communications.
Indexed as
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.