Cargando…
WHO-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing: process, methods, and findings
BACKGROUND: Differences in definitions and methodological approaches have hindered comparison and synthesis of economic evaluation results across multiple health domains, including immunization. At the request of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Immunization and Vaccines-related Implementation...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8902809/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35255920 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-022-02278-4 |
_version_ | 1784664670021353472 |
---|---|
author | Levin, Ann Boonstoppel, Laura Brenzel, Logan Griffiths, Ulla Hutubessy, Raymond Jit, Mark Mogasale, Vittal Pallas, Sarah Resch, Stephen Suharlim, Christian Yeung, Karene Hoi Ting |
author_facet | Levin, Ann Boonstoppel, Laura Brenzel, Logan Griffiths, Ulla Hutubessy, Raymond Jit, Mark Mogasale, Vittal Pallas, Sarah Resch, Stephen Suharlim, Christian Yeung, Karene Hoi Ting |
author_sort | Levin, Ann |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Differences in definitions and methodological approaches have hindered comparison and synthesis of economic evaluation results across multiple health domains, including immunization. At the request of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Immunization and Vaccines-related Implementation Research Advisory Committee (IVIR-AC), WHO convened an ad hoc Vaccine Delivery Costing Working Group, comprising experts from eight organizations working in immunization costing, to address a lack of standardization and gaps in definitions and methodological guidance. The aim of the Working Group was to develop a consensus statement harmonizing terminology and principles and to formulate recommendations for vaccine delivery costing for decision making. This paper discusses the process, findings of the review, and recommendations in the Consensus Statement. METHODS: The Working Group conducted several interviews, teleconferences, and one in-person meeting to identify groups working in vaccine delivery costing as well as existing guidance documents and costing tools, focusing on those for low- and middle-income country settings. They then reviewed the costing aims, perspectives, terms, methods, and principles in these documents. Consensus statement principles were drafted to align with the Global Health Cost Consortium costing guide as an agreed normative reference, and consensus definitions were drafted to reflect the predominant view across the documents reviewed. RESULTS: The Working Group identified four major workstreams on vaccine delivery costing as well as nine guidance documents and eleven costing tools for immunization costing. They found that some terms and principles were commonly defined while others were specific to individual workstreams. Based on these findings and extensive consultation, recommendations to harmonize differences in terminology and principles were made. CONCLUSIONS: Use of standardized principles and definitions outlined in the Consensus Statement within the immunization delivery costing community of practice can facilitate interpretation of economic evidence by global, regional, and national decision makers. Improving methodological alignment and clarity in program costing of health services such as immunization is important to support evidence-based policies and optimal resource allocation. On the other hand, this review and Consensus Statement development process revealed the limitations of our ability to harmonize given that study designs will vary depending upon the policy question that is being addressed and the country context. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12916-022-02278-4. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8902809 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89028092022-03-18 WHO-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing: process, methods, and findings Levin, Ann Boonstoppel, Laura Brenzel, Logan Griffiths, Ulla Hutubessy, Raymond Jit, Mark Mogasale, Vittal Pallas, Sarah Resch, Stephen Suharlim, Christian Yeung, Karene Hoi Ting BMC Med Guideline BACKGROUND: Differences in definitions and methodological approaches have hindered comparison and synthesis of economic evaluation results across multiple health domains, including immunization. At the request of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Immunization and Vaccines-related Implementation Research Advisory Committee (IVIR-AC), WHO convened an ad hoc Vaccine Delivery Costing Working Group, comprising experts from eight organizations working in immunization costing, to address a lack of standardization and gaps in definitions and methodological guidance. The aim of the Working Group was to develop a consensus statement harmonizing terminology and principles and to formulate recommendations for vaccine delivery costing for decision making. This paper discusses the process, findings of the review, and recommendations in the Consensus Statement. METHODS: The Working Group conducted several interviews, teleconferences, and one in-person meeting to identify groups working in vaccine delivery costing as well as existing guidance documents and costing tools, focusing on those for low- and middle-income country settings. They then reviewed the costing aims, perspectives, terms, methods, and principles in these documents. Consensus statement principles were drafted to align with the Global Health Cost Consortium costing guide as an agreed normative reference, and consensus definitions were drafted to reflect the predominant view across the documents reviewed. RESULTS: The Working Group identified four major workstreams on vaccine delivery costing as well as nine guidance documents and eleven costing tools for immunization costing. They found that some terms and principles were commonly defined while others were specific to individual workstreams. Based on these findings and extensive consultation, recommendations to harmonize differences in terminology and principles were made. CONCLUSIONS: Use of standardized principles and definitions outlined in the Consensus Statement within the immunization delivery costing community of practice can facilitate interpretation of economic evidence by global, regional, and national decision makers. Improving methodological alignment and clarity in program costing of health services such as immunization is important to support evidence-based policies and optimal resource allocation. On the other hand, this review and Consensus Statement development process revealed the limitations of our ability to harmonize given that study designs will vary depending upon the policy question that is being addressed and the country context. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12916-022-02278-4. BioMed Central 2022-03-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8902809/ /pubmed/35255920 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-022-02278-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Guideline Levin, Ann Boonstoppel, Laura Brenzel, Logan Griffiths, Ulla Hutubessy, Raymond Jit, Mark Mogasale, Vittal Pallas, Sarah Resch, Stephen Suharlim, Christian Yeung, Karene Hoi Ting WHO-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing: process, methods, and findings |
title | WHO-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing: process, methods, and findings |
title_full | WHO-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing: process, methods, and findings |
title_fullStr | WHO-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing: process, methods, and findings |
title_full_unstemmed | WHO-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing: process, methods, and findings |
title_short | WHO-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing: process, methods, and findings |
title_sort | who-led consensus statement on vaccine delivery costing: process, methods, and findings |
topic | Guideline |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8902809/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35255920 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-022-02278-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT levinann wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings AT boonstoppellaura wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings AT brenzellogan wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings AT griffithsulla wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings AT hutubessyraymond wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings AT jitmark wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings AT mogasalevittal wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings AT pallassarah wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings AT reschstephen wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings AT suharlimchristian wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings AT yeungkarenehoiting wholedconsensusstatementonvaccinedeliverycostingprocessmethodsandfindings |