Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42058675›Full record

ReviewGlobal & regional health technology assessment

A guide to critical reading of influenza vaccine cost-effectiveness analyses.

Raúl Ortiz de Lejarazu, Esther Redondo Margüello, Ángel Gil de Miguel, Federico Martinón Torres, Javier Díez Domingo, Juan L López-Belmonte Claver, Ariadna Díaz-Aguiló, J Manel Farré Avellà, Paloma I Palomo Jiménez, José M Abellán Perpiñán

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Global & regional health technology assessment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Raúl Ortiz de LejarazuNational Influenza Centre of Valladolid, Valladolid - Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4117-1186
Esther Redondo MargüelloInternational Healthcare Centre of Ayuntamiento de Madrid, Madrid - Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2791-979X
Ángel Gil de MiguelPreventive and Public Health Department, Rey Juan Carlos University, Madrid - Spain.
Federico Martinón TorresTranslational Paediatrics and Infectious Diseases Section, Paediatrics Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela - Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9023-581X
Javier Díez DomingoFundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO), Valencia - Spain.
Juan L López-Belmonte ClaverSanofi, Market Access, Madrid - Spain.
Ariadna Díaz-AguilóSanofi, Market Access, Madrid - Spain.
J Manel Farré AvellàSanofi, Medical Affairs, Barcelona - Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-6345-1656
Paloma I Palomo JiménezSanofi, Market Access, Madrid - Spain.
José M Abellán PerpiñánApplied Economics Department, Economics and Business Faculty, University of Murcia, Murcia - Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5656-4567

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Influenza vaccines are formulated each year to prevent serious illness in at-risk individuals, including elderly people. Healthcare decision-making is mainly based on the economic evaluations (EEs) (i.e., cost-effectiveness analysis [CEA]) of vaccines; however, understanding the limitations of these models and correctly interpreting the results may be challenging. Here, we provide a practical Guide that will help readers who are not experts in the field of health economics or influenza to critically review influenza vaccine EEs. Methods: This Guide is based on the findings of a systematic review of the literature, a critical analysis of the available EEs published for influenza vaccines for older adults in Spain, and applicable national and international guidelines on EE and influenza modeling. It has been developed by a multidisciplinary board of experts in influenza, vaccines, and health economics. Results: The guide provides tips to help the reader assess whether an EE design is fit for its purpose in terms of comparators, time horizon, perspective of the analysis, population analyzed, and whether appropriate modeling methods were applied. It detects the uncertainty arising from input data and the implications of this uncertainty on the results. Conclusions: Ultimately, this resource aims to empower decision-makers, particularly those without expertise in health economics or vaccinology, to critically read and interpret EEs, thus favoring evidence-based informed decisions that will improve the efficiency of influenza vaccination programs.

Indexed as

Critical readingEconomic evaluationsHealthcare decision-makingHealth policyInfluenza vaccination

Identifiers

PMID42058675
PMCPMC13123513

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.