MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969286496 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.190274

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of vaccination against herpes zoster in Canada: a modelling study

2019· article· en· W2969286496 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Mélanie Drolet, Zhou Zhou, Chantal Sauvageau, Philippe DeWals, Vladimir Gîlca, Rachid Amini, Élodie Bénard, Marc Brisson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalUniversité LavalInstitut National de Santé Publique du Québec
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMinistère de la SantéPublic Health AgencyMinistère de la Santé et des Services sociauxPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMedicineCost effectivenessPostherpetic neuralgiaVaccinationQuality-adjusted life yearVaccine efficacyCohortCost-effectiveness analysisCost–benefit analysisAttenuated vaccinePediatricsDemographyVirologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Two vaccines against herpes zoster are currently authorized for use in Canada: the recombinant subunit zoster vaccine and live attenuated zoster vaccine. We compared the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these 2 vaccines. METHODS: We used a decision analytic static cohort model parametrized with Canadian epidemiologic and economic data. We performed the economic analysis from the health care system perspective, using a lifetime horizon and a 3% discount rate for costs and benefits. The primary outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, relative to no vaccination. We ran 30 000 simulations varying all model parameters, including vaccine costs, efficacy and waning. RESULTS: The number needed to vaccinate (NNV) was higher for the live attenuated zoster vaccine than for the recombinant subunit zoster vaccine for all herpes zoster-related events at all ages. For example, in persons exactly 65 years old, for herpes zoster, median NNV was 21 (90% uncertainty interval [UI] 13-31) versus 8 (90% UI 6-18), and for postherpetic neuralgia, NNV was 64 (90% UI 33-93) versus 31 (90% UI 23-73). For the recombinant vaccine, the median cost-effectiveness ratios varied between cost-saving and $25 881 per QALY gained for adults aged 50 years or older. For the live vaccine, the cost-effectiveness ratios varied between cost-saving and $130 587 per QALY gained and were less than $45 000 per QALY gained only for those 65 to 75 years old. Given its higher efficacy, we estimated that the cost for the complete series of the recombinant vaccine could be $150 to $200 more than the cost of the live vaccine and still be considered cost-effective. INTERPRETATION: Our model predicted that the recombinant subunit zoster vaccine is likely cost-effective in Canada for adults 60 years or older, and is likely more cost-effective than live attenuated zoster vaccine. These results have informed updated national and provincial recommendations on herpes zoster vaccination.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207