MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417011994 · doi:10.1186/s12889-025-25726-1

Modelling the epidemiological impact and cost-effectiveness of possible changes to the meningococcal vaccination schedule for adolescents and young adults in the United States

2025· article· en· W4417011994 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Shin, Olivier Cristeau, Angie Upegui, Maureen P. Neary, Corwin A. Robertson, Katherine Galarza, E. Clay

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersSanofi France
KeywordsMeningococcal diseaseVaccinationMeningococcal vaccineEpidemiologyBiostatisticsYoung adultIncidence (geometry)Neisseria meningitidisPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The U.S. adolescent meningococcal vaccination schedule includes a quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MenACWY) dose at 11–12 years, a booster at 16 years, and—through shared clinical decision-making—a meningococcal serogroup B vaccine (MenB) series at 16 years and 6 months later (Q-QB-B schedule). This study evaluates the public health impact and cost-effectiveness of possible revisions to the schedule, considering the options currently under review by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). METHODS: We used a static, incidence-based population model to compare invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) incidence and mortality, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs. The model focused on serogroup B, C, W, and Y disease in a cohort of 11–25-year-olds. Incremental outcomes were estimated per year of incidence from the societal perspective for different schedules compared to Q-QB-B, applying a lifetime horizon to long-term IMD consequences. RESULTS: With Q-QB-B, 50 IMD cases were estimated to occur annually, resulting in 296 QALYs lost and total costs of $1.6 million (M). The N-P-B schedule (which eliminates the MenACWY dose at 11–12 years, replaces MenACWY and MenB with the pentavalent vaccine [MenABCWY] at age 16 years, and maintains administration of a MenB dose 6 months later) was less effective than Q-QB-B, leading to 13.7 additional IMD cases annually. It was also less costly, resulting in $599 M in savings and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $6.0 M per QALY lost. Relative to Q-QB-B, the Q-P-B schedule was estimated to avoid 1.5 additional IMD cases annually; all due to serogroup B, consistent with higher vaccination coverage against this serogroup in the Q-P-B schedule in which the second MenACWY dose and the first MenB dose at age 16 are replaced by MenABCWY. The additional costs for Q-P-B relative to Q-QB-B were estimated at $36.8 M and the ICER at $4.5 M per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Q-QB-B was the most cost-effective schedule. Scenarios replacing the MenACWY dose at age 16 years with MenABCWY were not cost-effective vs. Q-QB-B. While cost savings could result from eliminating the first MenACWY dose, this was estimated to result in increased IMD incidence with associated mortality and morbidity.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207