Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 182

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Seasonal influenza vaccination in China: Landscape of diverse regional reimbursement policy, and budget impact analysis

Open access
Yang, Juan, Atkins, Katherine E., Feng, Luzhao, Pang, Mingfan, Zheng, Yaming, Liu, Xinxin, Cowling, Benjamin J., Yu, Hongjie·2016·Vaccine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To explore the current landscape of seasonal influenza vaccination across China, and estimate the budget of implementing a national "free-at-the-point-of-care" vaccination program for priority populations recommended by the World Health Organization. METHODS: In 2014 and 2016, we conducted a survey across provincial Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to collect information on regional reimbursement policies for influenza vaccination, estimated the national uptake using distributed doses of influenza vaccines, and evaluated the budget using population size and vaccine cost obtained from official websites and literatures. RESULTS: Regular reimbursement policies for influenza vaccination are available in 61 mutually exclusive regions, comprising 8 provinces, 45 prefectures, and 8 counties, which were reimbursed by the local Government Financial Department or Basic Social Medical Insurance (BSMI). Finance-reimbursed vaccination was offered mainly for the elderly, and school children for free in Beijing, Dongli district in Tianjin, Karamay, Shenzhen and Xinxiang cities. BSMI-reimbursement policies were limited to specific medical insurance beneficiaries with distinct differences in the reimbursement fractions. The average national vaccination coverage was just 1.5-2.2% between 2004 and 2014. A free national vaccination program for priority populations (n=416million), would cost government US$ 757million (95% CI 726-789) annually (uptake rate=20%). CONCLUSIONS: An increasing number of regional governments have begun to pay, partially or fully, for influenza vaccination for selected groups. However, this small-scale policy approach has failed to increase national uptake. A free, nationwide vaccination program would require a substantial annual investment. A cost-effectiveness analysis is needed to identify the most efficient methods to improve coverage.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.10.013

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 182

Metadata

Authors
Yang, J., Atkins, K. E., Feng, L., Pang, M., Zheng, Y., Liu, X., Cowling, B. J., & Yu, H.
Venue
Vaccine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-11
Volume
34
Issue
47
Pages
5724-5735
ISSN
0264-410X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2530369142
Cited by
182
References
1
FWCI
14.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Seasonal influenza vaccination in China: Landscape of diverse regional reimbursement policy, and budget impact analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.10.013
The paper
Yang, J., Atkins, K. E., Feng, L., Pang, M., Zheng, Y., Liu, X., Cowling, B. J., & Yu, H. (2016). Seasonal influenza vaccination in China: Landscape of diverse regional reimbursement policy, and budget impact analysis. Vaccine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.10.013

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.