2012
DOI: 10.1093/heapol/czs035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New vaccine adoption: qualitative study of national decision-making processes in seven low- and middle-income countries

Abstract: As more new and improved vaccines become available, decisions on which to adopt into routine programmes become more frequent and complex. This qualitative study aimed to explore processes of national decision-making around new vaccine adoption and to understand the factors affecting these decisions. Ninety-five key informant interviews were conducted in seven low- and middle-income countries: Bangladesh, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Kenya, Mali and South Africa. Framework analysis was used to explore issues … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
65
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
(29 reference statements)
5
65
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, LMICs may not consider costeffectiveness results, because they lack the expertise to interpret them. Third, other criteria are more important than cost effectiveness for such decisions, as suggested by qualitative research on this topic [20]. For instance, while most of the analyses reviewed for both HPV and rotavirus make reference to the 'WHO-CHOICE thresholds' in helping to interpret the results of the cost-effectiveness analysis [10,11], they often make clear that budgetary constraints are a primary consideration in determining whether a 'cost-effective' intervention is implemented.…”
Section: Do Who-choice Thresholds Inform Funding Decisions For Vaccinmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Second, LMICs may not consider costeffectiveness results, because they lack the expertise to interpret them. Third, other criteria are more important than cost effectiveness for such decisions, as suggested by qualitative research on this topic [20]. For instance, while most of the analyses reviewed for both HPV and rotavirus make reference to the 'WHO-CHOICE thresholds' in helping to interpret the results of the cost-effectiveness analysis [10,11], they often make clear that budgetary constraints are a primary consideration in determining whether a 'cost-effective' intervention is implemented.…”
Section: Do Who-choice Thresholds Inform Funding Decisions For Vaccinmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In eligible countries, the price paid for the vaccine in the initial years of vaccine introduction is heavily subsided by the GAVI Alliance, with the cost of the programmes being transitioned to the countries themselves in later years. It has been suggested that the availability of this external support can be a major driver in vaccine adoption decisions [20]. Furthermore, the choice of payer (whether the GAVI Alliance, the national government or individual households) can substantially affect key outcomes of vaccine evaluations, including vaccine costs (whether GAVI-negotiated prices, country co-payment levels or market prices) and benefits (which depend on which budget they accrue to and what outcomes are valued by the payer).…”
Section: Who Pays and What Is The Cost Perspective?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, two papers specifically focused on national decision-making processes provide a review of available information from country case studies (15 countries) [19] or country interviews (95 countries) [20] to understand factors affecting decision-making on new vaccine adoption in low- and middle-income countries. These papers conclude that the local burden of disease data, vaccine prices and the cost implications of adopting a new vaccine are of particular importance in new vaccine adoption decisions in lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) and that the underlying driver for vaccine adoption decisions in Gavi-eligible countries was the desire to seize windows of opportunity for Gavi funding [19], [20].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent study of decision-making processes in relation to vaccines suggests that governments in low-and middle-income countries so far pay much less attention to cost-effectiveness evidence, with funding availability and political factors dominating decision-making [18].…”
Section: The Modern Era Of Health Economicsmentioning
confidence: 99%