ArticleBMC public health2026
Economic evidence for expansion of HPV vaccination for the prevention of cervical cancer in LMICs: BIA framework construction and empirical analysis in China.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLow- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), burdened with a high incidence of cervical cancer, often face challenges in implementing National Immunization Programs (NIP) or Provincial Immunization Programs (PIP) of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines. In the context of limited resources, the economic evidence provided by Budget Impact Analysis (BIA) becomes crucial for the inclusion of vaccines in the NIP and PIP.
methodsThis study adopted the perspective of the Basic Medical Insurance System (BMIS) payer, took the imported and domestic bivalent HPV vaccines as the target vaccines. We estimated the effect of HPV vaccines on burden of cervical cancer in China from 2019 to 2110, assuming that there were different reimbursement rates and market substitution rates for the vaccines. This study aimed to establish a comprehensive and standardized BIA framework that can be referenced to promote HPV vaccination in LMICs. Input parameters included vaccine efficacy vs. HPV 16/18, target age group, cancer treatment cost (per episode, over lifetime), discount rate, cohort size at 9 years old and etc., which were mainly derived from public sources, published literature, and a database of field surveys on treatment costs for patients of cervical cancer in China. Main outcomes encompassed incidence and treatment costs of cervical cancer, vaccination costs.
resultsThe proposed BIA framework included the target population, BIA, and uncertainty analysis across three scenarios based on origin. In the case of China, without immunization program, the average yearly spent on cervical cancer treatment throughout the country amounts to $6,736,507.32. Upon the execution of the immunization program (2019–2025), this expenditure reduced to $6,645,564.95 each year. Under Scenario 1–3, the vaccine reimbursement costs were $62,513,268.73, $44,927,307.37, and $58,916,163.27, respectively. During the period of immunization program, annual vaccination costs constituted a range of 0.05 to 1.08 parts per million relative to the current expenditure of BMIS fund and 2.68 and 14.12 parts per million relative to current balance of BMIS fund.
conclusionThe BIA framework provided a valuable reference for policy formulation in other LMICs with a high burden of cervical cancer that have not yet included the vaccine in their NIPs.
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.