Cargando…

Results from evaluations of models and cost-effectiveness tools to support introduction decisions for new vaccines need critical appraisal

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that the cost-effectiveness (CE) of introducing new vaccines be considered before such a programme is implemented. However, in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), it is often challenging to perform and interpret the results of model-based economic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hutubessy, Raymond, Henao, Ana Maria, Namgyal, Pem, Moorthy, Vasee, Hombach, Joachim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3117725/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21569407
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-55
_version_ 1782206360911347712
author Hutubessy, Raymond
Henao, Ana Maria
Namgyal, Pem
Moorthy, Vasee
Hombach, Joachim
author_facet Hutubessy, Raymond
Henao, Ana Maria
Namgyal, Pem
Moorthy, Vasee
Hombach, Joachim
author_sort Hutubessy, Raymond
collection PubMed
description The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that the cost-effectiveness (CE) of introducing new vaccines be considered before such a programme is implemented. However, in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), it is often challenging to perform and interpret the results of model-based economic appraisals of vaccines that benefit from locally relevant data. As a result, WHO embarked on a series of consultations to assess economic analytical tools to support vaccine introduction decisions for pneumococcal, rotavirus and human papillomavirus vaccines. The objectives of these assessments are to provide decision makers with a menu of existing CE tools for vaccines and their characteristics rather than to endorse the use of a single tool. The outcome will provide policy makers in LMICs with information about the feasibility of applying these models to inform their own decision making. We argue that if models and CE analyses are used to inform decisions, they ought to be critically appraised beforehand, including a transparent evaluation of their structure, assumptions and data sources (in isolation or in comparison to similar tools), so that decision makers can use them while being fully aware of their robustness and limitations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3117725
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31177252011-06-18 Results from evaluations of models and cost-effectiveness tools to support introduction decisions for new vaccines need critical appraisal Hutubessy, Raymond Henao, Ana Maria Namgyal, Pem Moorthy, Vasee Hombach, Joachim BMC Med Debate The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that the cost-effectiveness (CE) of introducing new vaccines be considered before such a programme is implemented. However, in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), it is often challenging to perform and interpret the results of model-based economic appraisals of vaccines that benefit from locally relevant data. As a result, WHO embarked on a series of consultations to assess economic analytical tools to support vaccine introduction decisions for pneumococcal, rotavirus and human papillomavirus vaccines. The objectives of these assessments are to provide decision makers with a menu of existing CE tools for vaccines and their characteristics rather than to endorse the use of a single tool. The outcome will provide policy makers in LMICs with information about the feasibility of applying these models to inform their own decision making. We argue that if models and CE analyses are used to inform decisions, they ought to be critically appraised beforehand, including a transparent evaluation of their structure, assumptions and data sources (in isolation or in comparison to similar tools), so that decision makers can use them while being fully aware of their robustness and limitations. BioMed Central 2011-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC3117725/ /pubmed/21569407 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-55 Text en Copyright ©2011 World Health Organization; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/about/charter/ This is an Open Access article in the spirit of the BioMed Central Open Access Charter http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/about/charter/, without any waiver of WHO's privileges and immunities under international law, convention or agreement. This article should not be reproduced for use in association with the promotion of commercial products, services or any legal entity. There should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation or products. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.
spellingShingle Debate
Hutubessy, Raymond
Henao, Ana Maria
Namgyal, Pem
Moorthy, Vasee
Hombach, Joachim
Results from evaluations of models and cost-effectiveness tools to support introduction decisions for new vaccines need critical appraisal
title Results from evaluations of models and cost-effectiveness tools to support introduction decisions for new vaccines need critical appraisal
title_full Results from evaluations of models and cost-effectiveness tools to support introduction decisions for new vaccines need critical appraisal
title_fullStr Results from evaluations of models and cost-effectiveness tools to support introduction decisions for new vaccines need critical appraisal
title_full_unstemmed Results from evaluations of models and cost-effectiveness tools to support introduction decisions for new vaccines need critical appraisal
title_short Results from evaluations of models and cost-effectiveness tools to support introduction decisions for new vaccines need critical appraisal
title_sort results from evaluations of models and cost-effectiveness tools to support introduction decisions for new vaccines need critical appraisal
topic Debate
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3117725/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21569407
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-55
work_keys_str_mv AT hutubessyraymond resultsfromevaluationsofmodelsandcosteffectivenesstoolstosupportintroductiondecisionsfornewvaccinesneedcriticalappraisal
AT henaoanamaria resultsfromevaluationsofmodelsandcosteffectivenesstoolstosupportintroductiondecisionsfornewvaccinesneedcriticalappraisal
AT namgyalpem resultsfromevaluationsofmodelsandcosteffectivenesstoolstosupportintroductiondecisionsfornewvaccinesneedcriticalappraisal
AT moorthyvasee resultsfromevaluationsofmodelsandcosteffectivenesstoolstosupportintroductiondecisionsfornewvaccinesneedcriticalappraisal
AT hombachjoachim resultsfromevaluationsofmodelsandcosteffectivenesstoolstosupportintroductiondecisionsfornewvaccinesneedcriticalappraisal