IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v26y2006i5p434-446.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Model, Methodological, and Parameter Uncertainty in the Economic Analysis of Vaccination Programs

Author

Listed:
  • M. Brisson

    (Modelling and Economics Unit, Health Protection Agency, London, UK, Department of Economics, City University, London, UK)

  • W. J. Edmunds

    (Modelling and Economics Unit, Health Protection Agency, London, UK, Department of Economics, City University, London, UK, John.Edmunds@HPA.org.uk)

Abstract

Guidelines for economic evaluations insist that the sensitivity of model results to alternative parameter values should be thoroughly explored. However, differences in model construction and analytical choices (such as the choice of a cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit framework) also introduce uncertainty in results, though these are rarely subjected to a thorough sensitivity analysis. In this article, the authors quantify the effect of model, methodological, and parameter uncertainty, taking varicella vaccination as an example. They used 3 different models (a static model, a dynamic model that only looks at the effect of vaccination on varicella, and a dynamic model that also assesses the implications of vaccination for zoster epidemiology) and 2 forms of analysis (cost-benefit and cost-utility). They also varied the discount rate and time frame of analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to estimate the impact of parameter uncertainty. In their example, model and methodological choice had a profound effect on estimated cost-effectiveness, but parameter uncertainty played a relatively minor role. Under cost-utility analysis, the probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that there was a near certainty that vaccination dominates no vaccination, or the other way around, depending on model choice and perspective. Under cost-benefit analysis, vaccination always appeared to be attractive. Thus, the authors clearly show that model and methodological assumptions can have greater impact on results than parameter estimates, although sensitivity analyses are rarely performed on these sources of uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Brisson & W. J. Edmunds, 2006. "Impact of Model, Methodological, and Parameter Uncertainty in the Economic Analysis of Vaccination Programs," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 26(5), pages 434-446, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:26:y:2006:i:5:p:434-446
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X06290485
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X06290485
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X06290485?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scuffham, P. & Devlin, N. & Eberhart-Phillips, J. & Wilson-Salt, R., 1999. "The cost-effectiveness of introducing a varicella vaccine to the New Zealand immunisation schedule," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 763-779, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elahe Khorasani & Majid Davari & Abbas Kebriaeezadeh & Farshad Fatemi & Ali Akbari Sari & Vida Varahrami, 2022. "A comprehensive review of official discount rates in guidelines of health economic evaluations over time: the trends and roots," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(9), pages 1577-1590, December.
    2. Laurent Coudeville & Annelies Van Rie & Denis Getsios & J Jaime Caro & Pascal Crépey & Van Hung Nguyen, 2009. "Adult Vaccination Strategies for the Control of Pertussis in the United States: An Economic Evaluation Including the Dynamic Population Effects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(7), pages 1-9, July.
    3. Anna K. Lugnér & Sido D. Mylius & Jacco Wallinga, 2010. "Dynamic versus static models in cost‐effectiveness analyses of anti‐viral drug therapy to mitigate an influenza pandemic," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(5), pages 518-531, May.
    4. Hossein Haji Ali Afzali & Jonathan Karnon & Olga Theou & Justin Beilby & Matteo Cesari & Renuka Visvanathan, 2019. "Structuring a conceptual model for cost-effectiveness analysis of frailty interventions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-13, September.
    5. Greg Plosker, 2011. "Rotavirus Vaccine RIX4414 (Rotarix™)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 29(11), pages 989-1009, November.
    6. Sun-Young Kim & Sue Goldie, 2008. "Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Vaccination Programmes," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 191-215, March.
    7. Marina Antoniou & Céu Mateus & Bruce Hollingsworth & Andrew Titman, 2024. "A Systematic Review of Methodologies Used in Models of the Treatment of Diabetes Mellitus," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 19-40, January.
    8. Michelle Tew & Michael Willis & Christian Asseburg & Hayley Bennett & Alan Brennan & Talitha Feenstra & James Gahn & Alastair Gray & Laura Heathcote & William H. Herman & Deanna Isaman & Shihchen Kuo , 2022. "Exploring Structural Uncertainty and Impact of Health State Utility Values on Lifetime Outcomes in Diabetes Economic Simulation Models: Findings from the Ninth Mount Hood Diabetes Quality-of-Life Chal," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 42(5), pages 599-611, July.
    9. Samir S Soneji & Hai-Yen Sung & Brian A Primack & John P Pierce & James D Sargent, 2018. "Quantifying population-level health benefits and harms of e-cigarette use in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, March.
    10. Sang-Man Kim & Arben Asllani, 2013. "Using simulation to establish appropriate vaccination rates and copayment policies from a cost perspective," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 7(3), pages 437-457, September.
    11. Joke Bilcke & Philippe Beutels, 2009. "Reviewing the Cost Effectiveness of Rotavirus Vaccination," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 281-297, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jane Hall & Patricia Kenny & Madeleine King & Jordan Louviere & Rosalie Viney & Angela Yeoh, 2002. "Using stated preference discrete choice modelling to evaluate the introduction of varicella vaccination," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(5), pages 457-465, July.
    2. Nancy Thiry & Philippe Beutels & Pierre Damme & Eddy Doorslaer, 2003. "Economic Evaluations of Varicella Vaccination Programmes," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 13-38, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:26:y:2006:i:5:p:434-446. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.