ReviewVaccines2026
Economic Evaluations of New Vaccine Introduction in Middle-Income Countries in the Middle East and North Africa Region: A Systematic Review.
Review in Vaccines, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesMiddle-income countries (MICs) in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) face financial and health system barriers when introducing new vaccines. The Gavi MICs approach has supported the introduction of pneumococcal conjugate (PCV), human papillomavirus (HPV), and rotavirus (RV) vaccines; however, economic evidence from the region remains limited. This systematic review assessed the quantity, characteristics, and quality of economic evaluations of these vaccines in MENA MICs published between 2015 and 2025 and synthesised economic evidence to inform policy decisions in Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, and Tunisia.
methodsRelevant databases and registries were searched for cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, cost-benefit, and budget impact analyses of PCV, HPV, and RV vaccination strategies. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality.
resultsTwenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria, including 12 on HPV, nine on RV, and five on PCV. Vaccine introduction was the most commonly evaluated intervention (
conclusionsAvailable evidence supports the economic value of PCV and RV introduction in MENA MICs, while HPV's cost-effectiveness is context dependent. Future evaluations should incorporate dynamic modelling, implementation costs, and affordability considerations to better inform sustainable vaccine introduction.
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.