The high price of new generations of vaccines relative to their predecessors has become an important consideration in debates over whether the benefits of the new vaccines justify their costs. An increasingly central line of inquiry in the literature on valuing vaccination surrounds accounting for the full social and economic benefits of vaccination. This paper applies this emerging perspective to the particular case of vaccination against serogroup B meningococcal disease (MenB). We explore key issues involved in health technology assessments of MenB vaccination, which have led to pronounced heterogeneity in evaluation methods and recommendation outcomes across countries such as France, Germany, the US, and the UK. Accounting for typically neglected sources of socioeconomic benefit could potentially impact recommendation and reimbursement decisions. We propose a taxonomy of such benefits built around four dimensions: (i) internalized health benefits, (ii) internalized non-health benefits, (iii) externalized health benefits, and (iv) externalized non-health benefits. This approach offers a systematic, comprehensive evaluation framework that can be used in future assessment of MenB vaccines as well as other health technologies.

Pediatric pneumococcal disease exacts a substantial burden on global health, much of which is vaccine-preventable. Despite this considerable burden and the demonstrably high efficacy of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs), the overall level of PCV uptake remains concerningly low, especially compared with that of other childhood-recommended vaccines, such as tuberculosis and polio. A broad set of plausible explanations exists for this low uptake, including logistical challenges, psychosocial factors and affordability. One additional and systematic cause of low uptake, which is the focus of our discussion, is economists’ and policymakers’ tendency to undervalue vaccination in general by adopting a narrow health sector perspective when performing economic evaluations of vaccines. We present an alternative, societal framework for economic evaluations that encompasses a broader set of socioeconomic benefits in addition to health benefits. Quantifying a more comprehensive taxonomy of PCV’s benefits will help to address potential undervaluation and may be sufficient not only to justify recommendation and reimbursement but also to stimulate efforts and investment toward closing coverage gaps.

All papers in the Holy Cross Working Paper Series should be considered draft versions subject to future revision. Comments and suggestions are welcome.

No abstract

No abstract