↓ Skip to main content

Estimating the cost-effectiveness profile of a universal vaccination programme with a nine-valent HPV vaccine in Austria

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 Mendeley
Title
Estimating the cost-effectiveness profile of a universal vaccination programme with a nine-valent HPV vaccine in Austria
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1483-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

L. Boiron, E. Joura, N. Largeron, B. Prager, M. Uhart

Abstract

HPV is a major cancer-causing factor in both sexes in the cervix, vulva, vagina, anus, penis, oropharynx as well as the causal factor in other diseases such as genital warts and recurrent respiratory papillomatis. In the context of the arrival of a nonavalent HPV vaccine (6/11/16/18/31/33/45/52/58), this analysis aims to estimate the public health impact and the incremental cost-effectiveness of a universal (girls and boys) vaccination program with a nonavalent HPV vaccine as compared to the current universal vaccination program with a quadrivalent HPV vaccine (6/11/16/18), in Austria. A dynamic transmission model including a wide range of health and cost outcomes related to cervical, anal, vulvar, vaginal diseases and genital warts was calibrated to Austrian epidemiological data. The clinical impact due to the 5 new types was included for cervical and anal diseases outcomes only. In the base case, a two-dose schedule, lifelong vaccine type-specific protection and a vaccination coverage rate of 60 % and 40 % for girls and boys respectively for the 9-year old cohorts were assumed. A cost-effectiveness threshold of €30,000/QALY-gained was considered. Universal vaccination with the nonavalent vaccine was shown to reduce the incidence of HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 -related cervical cancer by 92 %, the related CIN2/3 cases by 96 % and anal cancer by 83 % and 76 % respectively in females and males after 100 years, relative to 75 %, 76 %, 80 % and 74 % with the quadrivalent vaccine, respectively. Furthermore, the nonavalent vaccine was projected to prevent an additional 14,893 cases of CIN2/3 and 2544 cases of cervical cancer, over 100 years. Depending on the vaccine price, the strategy was shown to be from cost-saving to cost-effective. The present evaluation showed that vaccinating 60 % of girls and 40 % of boys aged 9 in Austria with a 9-valent vaccine will substantially reduce the incidence of cervical cancer, CIN and anal cancer compared to the existing strategy. The vaccination strategies performed with the 9-valent vaccine in the current study were all found to be cost-effective compared to the current quadrivalent vaccination strategy by considering a cost-effectiveness threshold of 30,000€/QALY gained.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 150 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 21%
Student > Bachelor 23 15%
Researcher 14 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 9%
Student > Postgraduate 10 7%
Other 28 19%
Unknown 30 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 23 15%
Unknown 37 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 03 July 2017.
All research outputs
#2,900,188
of 24,396,012 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#911
of 8,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,310
of 274,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#15
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,396,012 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 274,306 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.