ArticleEmerging microbes & infections2026
Cost-effectiveness analysis of hepatitis E screening and vaccination: targeting vulnerable populations in outbreak and sporadic settings in China.
Article in Emerging microbes & infections, 2026. 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.
- Clinical Guidelines for Hepatitis E Vaccination in India: An Expert Panel Consensus Report on the Recombinant Hepatitis E Vaccine, HEV 239.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Hepatitis E in Thailand: From Seroprevalence to Foodborne and Transfusion-Associated Risks.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the economic and health benefits of hepatitis E (HEV) screening and vaccination in both outbreak and sporadic settings in China. Decision-analytic Markov models were used to evaluate the population impact and cost-effectiveness of HEV screening and vaccination for people with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), older adults, pregnant women, and women of childbearing age. Simulations projected outcomes over six months for outbreak settings and lifetime horizons for sporadic settings. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were derived from a health system perspective with costs in 2023 US$. Robustness was examined through sensitivity analyses. Preventive universal screening combined with standard 3-dose HEV 239 vaccine was cost-effective only for people with CHB (Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]: $25.38 thousand per Quality-Adjusted Life Year [QALY] gained), reducing symptomatic infections by 58.16% and HEV-related deaths by 57.51% in sporadic settings. This strategy may be economically viable for other vulnerable populations if the vaccine price is below $21 per dose. In outbreak settings, reactive universal screening combined with emergency 2-dose vaccination yielded cost-effective for older adults, pregnant women, and people with CHB (ICERs of $8.80, $26.26, and $31.81 thousand per QALY gained), reducing symptomatic infections and HEV-related deaths by over 70% within six months. In China, where sporadic settings are more common, preventive universal HEV screening combined with standard 3-dose vaccination is cost-effective only for people with CHB. High vaccine costs render this strategy economically unfeasible for older adults, pregnant women, and women of childbearing age.
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.