Cited by 109Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsPharmaceutical Economics and Policy

Impact of model, methodological, and parameter uncertainty in the economic analysis of vaccination programs

Brisson, M., Edmunds, W. J.·2006·Medical Decision Making

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 assumpti…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0272989x06290485

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brisson, M., & Edmunds, W. J.
Affiliations
City, University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Edmunds, W. J.
Venue
Medical Decision Making
Published
2006-09
Volume
26
Issue
5
Pages
434-446
ISSN
  • 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-681X
OpenAlex
W2057127516
Cited by
109
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 18
FWCI
18.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medical Decision Making (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Herpesvirus Infections and Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Keywords
varicella vaccination, model uncertainty, methodological uncertainty, parameter uncertainty, cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit analysis, cost-utility analysis, discount rate, time horizon, sensitivity analysis
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Child, Child, Preschool, Costs and Cost Analysis, Humans, Infant, Middle Aged, Probability, Sensitivity and Specificity, Models, Econometric, Immunization Programs, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Chickenpox Vaccine, Uncertainty

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