Group Report: Developing an Eradication Investment Case

Thompson, Kimberly M.; Rabinovich, R.L.; Conteh, Lesong; Emerson, Claudia I.; Hall, Bronwyn; Сингер, Петер; Vijayaraghavan, Maya; Walker, Damian

doi:10.7551/mitpress/9780262016735.003.0010

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Transmission models should be improved, as epidemiologic modelling is a powerful tool to prioritize alternative tools and interventions and evaluate endgame strategies as donors commit to zero leprosy [ 32 ]. An Elimination Investment Case (EIC) provides a framework for a systematic assessment of what is needed to achieve zero leprosy and the challenges, risk, and sustainability of various initiatives [ 33 , 34 ].…”

Section: Panel: the Research Priorities To Achieve Zero Leprosymentioning

confidence: 99%

A comprehensive research agenda for zero leprosy

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Leprosy control achieved dramatic success in the 1980s–1990s with the implementation of short course multidrug therapy, which reduced the global prevalence of leprosy to less than 1 in 10 000 population. However, a period of relative stagnation in leprosy control followed this achievement, and only limited further declines in the global number of new cases reported have been achieved over the past decade. Main text In 2016, major stakeholders called for the development of an innovative and comprehensive leprosy strategy aimed at reducing the incidence of leprosy, lowering the burden of disability and discrimination, and interrupting transmission. This led to the establishment of the Global Partnership for Zero Leprosy (GPZL) in 2018, with partners aligned around a shared Action Framework committed to achieving the WHO targets by 2030 through national leprosy program capacity-building, resource mobilisation and an enabling research agenda. GPZL convened over 140 experts from more than 20 countries to develop a research agenda to achieve zero leprosy. The result is a detailed research agenda focusing on diagnostics, mapping, digital technology and innovation, disability, epidemiological modelling and investment case, implementation research, stigma, post exposure prophylaxis and transmission, and vaccines. This research agenda is aligned with the research priorities identified by other stakeholders. Conclusions Developing and achieving consensus on the research agenda for zero leprosy is a significant step forward for the leprosy community. In a next step, research programmes must be developed, with individual components of the research agenda requiring distinct expertise, varying in resource needs, and operating over different timescales. Moving toward zero leprosy now requires partner alignment and new investments at all stages of the research process, from discovery to implementation.

show abstract

Section: Panel: the Research Priorities To Achieve Zero Leprosymentioning

confidence: 99%

A comprehensive research agenda for zero leprosy

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Economic analyses can play a critical role in supporting disease eradication and elimination efforts . Although a recent review included economic analyses for elimination of disease in individual countries, we focus on global and WHO regional analyses for which relatively few economic analyses exist.…”

Section: Framing Economic Analyses To Inform Disease Eradication and mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent attention to the development of investment cases for disease elimination and eradication recognizes the importance of providing economic analyses of the potential benefits for stakeholder consideration . The framing of the analysis (i.e., the key choices made as identified in this section) will impact the results, and the wide range of combinations of options that exist suggests many potential analyses.…”

Section: Framing Economic Analyses To Inform Disease Eradication and mentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling and Managing the Risks of Measles and Rubella: A Global Perspective Part II

Thompson

2017

Risk Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measles and rubella continue to circulate globally. Complementing Part I of the special issue, this introduction provides a contrast between other global eradication initiatives and the experience with measles and rubella eradication to date. This introduction builds on the syntheses of the literature provided in Part I and it describes the creation and application of a national risk assessment tool and the development of a dynamic disease transmission model to support global efforts to optimally manage measles and rubella globally using vaccines. Currently, efforts to eradicate measles and rubella suffer from the lack of a commitment to global eradication by key stakeholders, despite strong evidence that their eradication represents a better health and financial option than continued control.

show abstract

“…For countries with limited resources, large short‐term costs that exceed short‐term benefits may represent a significant barrier for which support from external funders may represent an important incentive. Innovative financing methods may help to address short‐term market failures . National perceptions about vaccination will need to focus on cases prevented instead of looking myopically at the current burden of disease.…”

Section: Extension To Current Vaccinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framework for Optimal Global Vaccine Stockpile Design for Vaccine‐Preventable Diseases: Application to Measles and Cholera Vaccines as Contrasting Examples

Thompson

Tebbens²

2014

Risk Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Managing the dynamics of vaccine supply and demand represents a significant challenge with very high stakes. Insufficient vaccine supplies can necessitate rationing, lead to preventable adverse health outcomes, delay the achievements of elimination or eradication goals, and/or pose reputation risks for public health authorities and/or manufacturers. This article explores the dynamics of global vaccine supply and demand to consider the opportunities to develop and maintain optimal global vaccine stockpiles for universal vaccines, characterized by large global demand (for which we use measles vaccines as an example), and nonuniversal (including new and niche) vaccines (for which we use oral cholera vaccine as an example). We contrast our approach with other vaccine stockpile optimization frameworks previously developed for the United States pediatric vaccine stockpile to address disruptions in supply and global emergency response vaccine stockpiles to provide on-demand vaccines for use in outbreaks. For measles vaccine, we explore the complexity that arises due to different formulations and presentations of vaccines, consideration of rubella, and the context of regional elimination goals. We conclude that global health policy leaders and stakeholders should procure and maintain appropriate global vaccine rotating stocks for measles and rubella vaccine now to support current regional elimination goals, and should probably also do so for other vaccines to help prevent and control endemic or epidemic diseases. This work suggests the need to better model global vaccine supplies to improve efficiency in the vaccine supply chain, ensure adequate supplies to support elimination and eradication initiatives, and support progress toward the goals of the Global Vaccine Action Plan.

show abstract

Group Report: Developing an Eradication Investment Case

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

A comprehensive research agenda for zero leprosy

A comprehensive research agenda for zero leprosy

Modeling and Managing the Risks of Measles and Rubella: A Global Perspective Part II

Framework for Optimal Global Vaccine Stockpile Design for Vaccine‐Preventable Diseases: Application to Measles and Cholera Vaccines as Contrasting Examples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About