2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.12.065
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimated impact and cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination in Senegal: A country-led analysis

Abstract: From both perspectives, introducing the rotavirus vaccine is highly cost-effective compared to no vaccination. The results are consistent with those found in many African countries. The ProVac process and tools contributed to a collaborative, country-led process in Senegal that provides a platform for gathering and reporting evidence for vaccine decision-making.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
19
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
2
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…If per capita income thresholds were applied using Bangladesh’s 2015 per capita GNI of $1190, rotavirus vaccination would be highly cost-effective in five of six scenarios, and cost-effective in the “low mortality, no Gavi subsidy” scenario [38]. This result is consistent with results from other low resource countries with a high rotavirus burden [11], [12], [13], [39]. Importantly, this analysis also demonstrates that rotavirus vaccination can be cost-effective outside of high mortality contexts and absent Gavi support.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 67%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…If per capita income thresholds were applied using Bangladesh’s 2015 per capita GNI of $1190, rotavirus vaccination would be highly cost-effective in five of six scenarios, and cost-effective in the “low mortality, no Gavi subsidy” scenario [38]. This result is consistent with results from other low resource countries with a high rotavirus burden [11], [12], [13], [39]. Importantly, this analysis also demonstrates that rotavirus vaccination can be cost-effective outside of high mortality contexts and absent Gavi support.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 67%
“…The model is designed to be used at the country-level to conduct cost-effectiveness analyses for three vaccines: Rotavirus vaccine, Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, and Haemophilus influenza type b and provides a consistent and transparent framework for comparing the impact and cost-effectiveness of these vaccines [10]. The model has been widely used across the world to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these vaccines [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. The model input parameters include: demographics, burden of disease, vaccine schedule, vaccine efficacy, vaccine coverage, vaccine costs, health service utilization, and health service costs.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An adjustment factor for relative coverage was applied to the coverage estimates to account for the likelihood that children at the highest risk of dying from rotavirus disease are less likely to be vaccinated [ 50 ]. The inclusion of relative coverage in the CEAs increased over time (Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, PATH led studies in AFR, complementing work previously conducted in other African countries. The current supplement showcases a more detailed description of AMP’s experience, as well as country-led publications from the three regions studied [512]. …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%