Publication: A systematic review of economic evaluations of vaccines in Middle East and North Africa countries: is existing evidence good enough to support policy decision-making?
Issued Date
2021-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
17448379
14737167
14737167
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85111630764
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. Vol.21, No.6 (2021), 1159-1178
Suggested Citation
Mouaddh Abdulmalik Nagi, Chaisiri Luangsinsiri, Montarat Thavorncharoensap A systematic review of economic evaluations of vaccines in Middle East and North Africa countries: is existing evidence good enough to support policy decision-making?. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. Vol.21, No.6 (2021), 1159-1178. doi:10.1080/14737167.2021.1954508 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/78673
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
A systematic review of economic evaluations of vaccines in Middle East and North Africa countries: is existing evidence good enough to support policy decision-making?
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Introduction: A vaccine introduction process should be systematic and transparent and take into account many factors, including cost-effectiveness evidence. This study aimed to assess quantity, characteristic, and quality of economic evaluation (EE) studies on vaccines performed in Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries. Areas covered: PubMed and Scopus electronic databases were searched since inception to December 2019 to identify published EE studies of vaccines, which were conducted in the 26 MENA countries. Methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Expert opinion: Of the 616 studies identified, 46 were included in the review. Most studies (65%) were conducted in Iran, Israel, and Turkey. The most commonly evaluated vaccines were rotavirus vaccine (n = 15; 33%), human Papillomavirus vaccine (n = 8; 17%), and pneumococcal vaccine (n = 7; 15%). We classified 5 (11%), 27 (59%), 12 (26%), and 2 (4%) studies as excellent, good, moderate, and poor quality, respectively. There were limited cost-effectiveness evidences in the region. It is imperative to have local guidelines on good practice and reporting, availability of local data, and funding sources to improve quantity and quality of EE studies of vaccines in the region, thereby, facilitating transparent and consistent decision-making processes.