“…23 Other reasons for not defining which vaccine to be evaluated are: (1) the information from websites of municipalities where subsidies were given to their inhabitant vaccinees to uptake RV1/RV5 shows that costs per course of the 2 are around the same, whereas costs per dose of RV1 is higher than that of RV5. Even though there is a difference with regard to the number of doses per course between RV1 and RV5, 2 doses and 3 doses, respectively, this difference on vaccine cost is eventually offset by the doctor's fee for medical advice and technical fee for administering the vaccine; around < 3,500 or US$33 per shot, (2) Japan Pediatric Society offers no vaccine preference between the 2, which implies that when the municipality implements the rotavirus immunisation program, RV1 and RV5 are considered to be equal, (3) 2 relevant cost-effectiveness studies which compared the routine rotavirus immunisation program to no immunisation program in Japan were identified, one is a manufacturer-sponsored study which evaluated cost-effectiveness of RV5 immunisation program, 21 the other is an academic-based study, which assumed that there is no difference in both vaccination costs and effectiveness between the 2 vaccines, 20 and (4) since there is no difference in the effectiveness and costs of both vaccines, our study evaluated mainly the efficiency of the immunisation program, and not that of the products. We took into account asymptomatic infected cases and rotavirus related-encephalitis/encephalopathy as a novelty of this study.…”