MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cost-Utility Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccination Strategies for Endemic SARS-CoV-2

2025· article· en· W4411257285 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rafael N. Miranda, Alison E. Simmons, Michael Li, Gebremedhin Beedemariam Gebretekle, Min Xi, Marina I. Salvadori, Bryna Warshawsky, Eva Wong, Raphael Ximenes, Melissa K. Andrew, Beate Sander, Davinder Singh, Sarah E. Wilson, Matthew Tunis, Ashleigh R. Tuite

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaWestern UniversityInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesMcGill UniversityMcMaster UniversityPublic Health OntarioToronto General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakVirologyVaccinationMedicineBetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsOutbreakInternal medicineDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: With shifting epidemiology and changes in the vaccine funding landscape, resource use considerations for COVID-19 vaccination programs are increasingly important. Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination programs, where eligibility is defined by combinations of age and chronic medical conditions, including a strategy similar to current Canadian recommendations. Design, Setting, and Participants: Static, individual-based, probabilistic cost-utility model economic evaluation parameterized with recent data describing COVID-19 epidemiology, vaccine characteristics, and costs. The analysis used a 15-month time horizon from July 2024 to September 2025 and a modeled cohort of 1 million people with characteristics based on the Canadian population, stratified by age group and presence or absence of at least 1 chronic medical condition. Exposure: Annual or biannual COVID-19 vaccination strategies offered to different age and medical risk groups, with annual vaccination occurring in October and November in the primary analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Medically attended SARS-CoV-2 infections treated in outpatient and inpatient settings, including post-COVID condition cases and deaths. Costs in 2023 Canadian dollars, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), discounted at 1.5% for the health system and societal perspectives. Results: Among 1 million simulated individuals, annual vaccination for adults aged 65 years and older consistently emerged as a cost-effective intervention, with ICERs less than CAD $50 000 per QALY compared with no vaccination for a range of model assumptions. Adding a second dose for adults aged 65 years and older or expanding programs to include vaccination for younger age groups, including those at higher risk of COVID-19 due to chronic medical conditions, generally resulted in ICERs greater than $50 000 per QALY. Shifting timing of vaccination programs to better align with periods of high COVID-19 case occurrence resulted in biannual vaccination for those aged 65 years and older being cost effective. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination strategies, programs were observed to be cost effective when focused on groups at higher risk of disease. Optimal timing of programs improved the cost effectiveness of vaccination strategies. As COVID-19 transitioned to an endemic disease with high levels of population immunity, many jurisdictions revisited COVID-19 vaccination recommendations; these results identified COVID-19 vaccination programs that may provide good value for money.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207