Economic evaluation of high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine in adults aged ≥65 years: A systematic literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Due to waning immunity, adults aged ≥65 years are at increased risk of seasonal influenza infection and its complications. Adding to this risk, older adults have reduced responses to influenza vaccines. A high-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (Fluzone High-Dose, Sanofi Pasteur) (IIV3-HD) was developed to improve protection against influenza in adults aged ≥65 years and has been licensed in the US since 2009 and in Canada since 2015. Post-licensure studies have shown that IIV3-HD is more effective than standard-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3-SD) at protecting against influenza infection in this population. Here, we performed a systematic review of economic analyses of IIV3-HD in adults aged ≥65 years. METHODS: On June 9, 2019, using the Ovid search platform, we searched Econlit, Embase, and Ovid MEDLINE® for original studies published in peer-reviewed journals examining the economics or cost-effectiveness of IIV3-HD in adults aged ≥65 years. Two reviewers independently selected studies and assessed their quality. RESULTS: Seven studies were selected, all performed in the US or Canada. Five studies were funded by IIV3-HD manufacturer, and the remaining two by the US National Institute of General Medical Sciences. In all studies, IIV3-HD reduces healthcare resource utilization and is cost-effective or cost-saving compared to IIV3-SD. The main driver is reduced hospitalizations for cardiorespiratory events. CONCLUSION: IIV3-HD is cost-saving or cost-effective versus IIV3-SD in adults aged ≥65 years. Reduced cardiorespiratory complications are an important driver of these economic benefits. A video summary of the article can be accessed via the Supplementary data link at the end of this article.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.065 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".