ArticleVaccines2024
Cost-Effectiveness of Hepatitis E Vaccination Strategies among Patients with Chronic Liver Diseases in China: A Model-Based Evaluation.
Article in Vaccines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Closing Editorial-Special Issue on "Vaccines and Vaccination: HIV, Hepatitis Viruses and HPV".Vaccines · 2026Article
- Hepatitis E vaccination status, knowledge, attitude, and practice among university freshmen: a cross-sectional study in China.Frontiers in public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a leading cause of acute viral hepatitis worldwide, primarily transmitted through contaminated water and food. In patients with chronic liver disease (CLD), HEV infection might worsen the prognosis. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis E vaccination strategies in CLD patients. A decision tree-Markov cohort model was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of universal-vaccination, vaccination-following-screening, and no-vaccination strategies in 100,000 CLD patients over their lifetimes, simulating cohorts aged ≥16 years, ≥40 years, and ≥60 years, based on the licensed vaccination ages and typical ages of CLD onset, from a societal perspective. Model parameters were retrieved and estimated from previous publications and government data. The outcomes included HEV-related cases, costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Compared to no-vaccination, universal-vaccination reduced HEV-related cases by 32.8% to 39.6%, while vaccination-following-screening reduced them by 38.1% to 49.3%. Furthermore, universal-vaccination showed ICERs of USD 6898.33, USD 6638.91, and USD 6582.69 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for cohorts aged ≥16, ≥40, and ≥60 years, respectively. Moreover, the vaccination-following-screening strategy significantly enhanced cost-effectiveness, with ICERs decreasing to USD 6201.55, USD 5199.46, and USD 4919.87 per QALY for the cohorts. Additionally, one-way sensitivity analysis identified the discount rate and utility for CLD patients as the key factors influencing ICER. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated the vaccination-following-screening strategy was cost-effective with probabilities of 92.50%, 95.70%, and 95.90% for each cohort. Hepatitis E vaccination in CLD patients costs less than GDP per capita for each QALY gained in China. The vaccination-following-screening strategy may be the optimal option, especially in those over 60 years.
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.