| Title |
Cost Effectiveness of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination for Men Who have Sex with Men; Reviewing the Available Evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PharmacoEconomics, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40273-018-0649-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Didik Setiawan, Abrham Wondimu, KohJun Ong, Albert Jan van Hoek, Maarten J. Postma |
| Abstract |
Men who have sex with men require special attention for human papillomavirus vaccination given elevated infection risks and the development of, in particular, anal cancer. Our purpose was to review the cost effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccination for both currently vaccine-eligible and non-eligible individuals, particularly the men-who-have-sex-with-men population, and synthesize the available evidence. We systematically searched for published articles in two main databases (PubMed and EMBASE). Screening and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. The risk of bias was assessed using a validated instrument (Bias in Economic Evaluation, ECOBIAS). Methodological aspects, study results, and sensitivity analyses were extracted and synthesized to generate a consistent overview of the cost effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccination in the men-who-have-sex-with-men population. From 770 identified articles, four met the inclusion criteria. Across the studies, human papillomavirus vaccination showed incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from dominant to US$96,146 and US$14,000 to US$18,200 for tertiary prevention and primary prevention, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio seemed most sensitive to vaccine efficacy, vaccine costs, and the incidence of anal cancer in the selected target populations. This review presents the human papillomavirus vaccine, both as a primary and adjuvant (tertiary) vaccination, as a potentially cost-effective strategy for preventing mainly-but not limited to only-anal cancer in men-who-have-sex-with-men populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 50% |
| United States | 2 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 42% |
| Scientists | 5 | 42% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 22% |
| Unknown | 16 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 21 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 May 2019.
All research outputs
#2,899,809
of 24,052,577 outputs
Outputs from PharmacoEconomics
#273
of 1,940 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,352
of 330,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PharmacoEconomics
#7
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,052,577 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,940 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,599 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.