ArticleBMC public health2025
Public health impact and cost-effectiveness of introducing MenACWY vaccination strategies in Germany.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Public Health Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Revising the Adolescent Meningococcal Vaccine Schedule in the United States.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) routine immunization recommendation in Germany is a meningococcal serogroup C (MenC) conjugate vaccine for toddlers aged 12 months with a catch-up for unimmunized up to 17 years. However, there are no recommendations for routine meningococcal serogroups A, C, W, Y (MenACWY) vaccination or for adolescent vaccinations; this differs from other European countries. This analysis aimed to understand the benefits of implementing adolescent MenACWY vaccination in Germany.
methodsA static population-cohort model evaluating IMD burden and related health outcomes (e.g., cases, cases with long-term sequelae, deaths) was developed to compare any two meningococcal vaccination strategies. We compared hypothetical vaccination strategies that included different approaches to adolescent vaccination in Germany, such as vaccinating at 13-year olds versus 16-year olds and vaccinating with MenC versus MenACWY. Additional strategies considered the benefit that could be provided by switching the current MenC vaccine recommendation in toddlers to MenACWY.
resultsAll strategies that included MenACWY vaccine were effective in decreasing the number of cases, preventing mortality and offered good value for money. The greatest benefit was observed in individuals vaccinated with MenACWY at 12 months and 16 years of age (2,978 IMD cases averted; 563 IMD deaths prevented). Compared with the current strategy of MenC vaccination at 12 months of age, two-dose strategies that included MenACWY reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios <€13,205 per quality-adjusted life year. Adolescent strategies of MenC or MenACWY vaccine at 16 years old (with no vaccination at 12 months) dominated current vaccination strategies. Adolescent vaccination at 16 years old versus 13 years old offered slightly better value for money.
conclusionsWith recent increases in IMD cases and outbreaks occurring globally following the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a greater urgency to proactively implement a MenACWY vaccine recommendation to protect adolescents in Germany. This recommendation would provide direct protection to a group at increased risk and offer indirect protection to other population groups. Implementation of a school-based immunization program could increase vaccine uptake and overcome hurdles in adolescent vaccination.
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.